
aass_:LA.5i 



Book 



Jd-U ■ 



PUBLICATIONS OF THE SOCIETY FOR THE COLLEGIATE INSTRUCTION 

OF WOMEN 

Fay House Monographs 

No. 3 



FUGITIVE SLAVES 

(1619-1865) 



BY • 

MARION GLEASON McDOUGALL 



PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF 

ALBERT BUSHNELL HART, Ph.D. 

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF HISTORY IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY 



BOSTON, U.S.A. 

PUBLISHED BY GINN & COMPANY 

1891 



■MI3 

Co h ^f^Z 



Copyright, 1891, 
By the Society for the Collegiate Instruction of Women. 



Gift 
The University 



John Wilson and Son, Cambridge. 



5:^ 



EDITOR'S PREFACE. 



Every careful student of history is aware that it is no longer 
possible to write the general history of any important country from 
the original sources ; on any period, the materials which accumu- 
late in a year are more than can be assimilated by one mind in 
three years. The general historian must use the results of others' 
work. It is therefore essential that the great phases of political and 
constitutional development be treated in monographs, each devoted 
to a single, limited subject and each prepared on a careful and 
scientific method. 

This first number of the historical series of the Fay House 
Monographs aims to discuss the single topic of Fugitive Slaves. 
Mrs. McDougall has drawn together and -compared many cases 
found in obscure sources, and has perhaps been able to correct 
some commonly received impressions on this neglected subject. 

Even in its limited range this does not pretend to be a complete 
work in the sense .that all the available cases are discussed or 
recorded. The effort has been made to use the cases as illustra- 
tions of principles, and to add such bibliography as may direct the 
reader^to further details. The appendix of laws is as full as it was 
possible to make it from the collections in the Boston Public and 
Massachusetts State Libraries. If the monograph prove useful to 
the student of American history, it will meet the expectations of 
author and editor. 



ALBERT BUSHNELL HART. 



Cambridge, April 2, 1S91. 



[iii] 



AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 



The following monograph was written while the author was a 
student in the " Harvard Annex " as a study in the Seminary 
course given by Professor Albert Bushnell Hart. The work has 
continued during parts of the four years since 1887. The effort 
has been to trace in some measure the development of public senti- 
ment upon the subject, to prepare an outline of Colonial legislation 
and of the work of Congress during the entire period, and to give 
accounts of typical cases illustrative of conditions and opinions. 
Only a few of the more important cases are described minutely, 
but a critical list of the authorities may be found in the biblio- 
graphical appendix. 

The thanks of the author are due first to Professor Hart, under 
whose direction and with whose assistance and encouragement the 
monograph has been prepared ; then to Miss Anna B. Thompson, 
without whose careful training in the Thayer Academy and con- 
tinued sympathy, the work could not have been undertaken. 
Many thanks are due also to the authorities of the Library of 
Harvard College for the use, in the alcoves, of their large and con- 
veniently arranged collection of books and pamphlets on United 
States History, and to the assistants in the Boston Public and 
Massachusetts State Libraries for courteous aid. Colonel T. W. 
Higginson has kindly examined the chapter on the cases from 
1850 to i860, suggesting some interesting details; and Mr. Arthur 
Gilman has read the whole in proof, and made many valuable 
suggestions. 

MARION GLEASON McDOUGALL. 

Rockland, Mass., April 2, 1S91. 

[iv] 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. 

LEGISLATION AND CASES BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION. 

Page 

§ I Elements of colonial slavery i 

§ 2. Regulations as to fugitives (1640-1700) 2 

§ 3. Treatment of fugitives 3 

§ 4. Regulations in New England colonies 4 

§ 5. Escapes in New England : Attucks case 5 

§ 6. Dutch regulations in New Netherlands 6 

§ 7. Escapes from New Amsterdam 6 

§ 8. Intercolonial regulations 7 

§ 9. Intercolonial cases , ° 

§ 10. International relations 9 

§ II. Intfernational cases - 'O 

§ 12. Relations with the mother country • " 

§ 13. Regulation under the Articles of Confederation ( 1781-1788) 12 

§ 14. Ordinance for the Northwest Territory (1787) 13 

§ 15. The Fugitive question in the Constitutional Conventions 14 

CHAPTER II. 

LEGISLATION FROM 17S9 TO 1850. 

§ 16. Effect of the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution 16 

§ 17. The first Fugitive Slave Act (1793) J^_ 

§ 18. Discussion of the first act '° 

§ 19. Propositions of 1797 and 1802 ^9 

§ 20. Propositions from 1S17 to 1822 21 

§ 21. Period of the Missouri Compromise ( 1819-1822) 23 

§ 22. Status of the question from 1S23 to 1847 -4 

§ 23. Canada and Mexico places of refuge 25 

§ 24. Status of fugitives on the high seas 26 

§ 25. Kidnapping from 1793 to 1850: Prigg case 27 

§ 26. Necessity of more stringent fugitive slave provisions 28 

§ 27. Action of Congress from 1847 to 1850 28 

§ 28. Slavery in the District of Columbia 29 

§ 29. The second Fugitive Slave Act (1850) 2^^ 

§ 30. Provisions of the second Fugitive Slave Act 3° 

§ 31. Arguments for the bill 3' 

§ 32. Arguments against the bill 3^ 

[v] 



vi Fugitive Slaves. 



CHAPTER III. 

PRINCIPAL CASES FROM 1789 TO 1860. 

Page 

§ 33. Change in character of cases 34 

§ 34. The first case of rescue ( 1793) 35 

§ 35. President Washington's denaand for a fugitive (1796) 35 

§ 36. Kidnapping cases 36 

§ 37. Jones case ( 1S36) 36 

§ 38. Solomon Northup case (about 1830) 37 

§ 39- Washington case (between 1S40 and 1850) 38 

§ 40. Oberlin case (1841) 38 

§ 41. Interference and rescues 38 

§ 42. Chickasaw rescue (1836) 38 

§ 43. Philadelphia case (1838) 39 

§ 44. Latimer case (1842) 39 

§ 45. Ottoman case ( 1846) 40 

§ 46. Interstate relations 41 

§ 47. Boston and Isaac cases (1837, 1839) 41 

§ 48. Ohio and Kentucky cases {1848) 41 

§ 49. Prosecutions 42 

§ 50. Van Zandt, Pearl, and Walker cases (1840, 1844) 42 

§ 51. Unpopularity of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 43 

§ 52. Principle of the selection of cases 43 

§ 53. Hamlet case (1850) 43 

§ 54. Sims case ( 1851 ) 44 

§ 55. Burns case (1854) 45 

§ 56. Garner case ( 1856) 46 

§ 57. Shadrach case (1851) 47 

§ 58. Jerry McHenry case (1851) 48 

§ 59. Oberlin-Wellington case (1858) 49 

§ 60. Christiana case ( 1851 ) 50 

§ 61. Miller case (1851) 51 

§ 62. John Brown in Kansas (1858) 51 



CHAPTER IV. 
FUGITIVES AXD THEIR FRIENDS. 
Methods of escape ^}, 



§64 
§65 
§66 
§67 
§68 
§69 



Reasons for escape 54 

Conditions of slave life 55 

Escapes to the woods 5^ 

Escapes to the North 57 

Use of protection papers 58 

Fugitives disguised as whites: Craft case 58 



Contents. vii 

Page 

70. Underground Railroad 60 

§ 71. Rise and growth of the system 60 

§ 72. Metliods pursued 61 

§ 73. Colored agents of the Underground Railroad 62 

§ 74. Prosecutions of agents 63 

§ 75. Formal organization 63 

§ 76. Generaleffect of escapes 04 



CHAPTER V. 

PERSOiYAL LIBERTY LAWS. 

§ 77. Character of the personal liberty laws 65 

§ 78. Acts passed before the Prigg decision (i 793-1 842) 05 

§ 79. Acts passed between the Prigg decision and the second Fugitive Slave 

Law ( 1842-1850) 66 

§ 80. Acts occasioned by the law of 1850 ( 1850-1S60) 66 

§ 81. Massachusetts acts 67 

§ 82. Review of the acts by States 69 

§ 83. Effect of the personal liberty laws 70 

CHAPTER VI. 
THE END OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE QUESTION (1S60-1SG5). 

§ 85. The Fugitive Slave Law in the crisis of 1860-61 71 

§ 86. Proposition to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law 72 

§ 87. Propositions to repeal or amend the law 7 j 

§ 88. The question of slaves of rebels 7 ? 

§ 89. Slavery attacked in Congress 74 

§ 90. Confiscation bills 75 

§ 91. Confiscation provisions extended 75 

§ 92. Effect of the Emancipation Proclamation ( 1S63) 77 

§ 93. Fugitives in loyal slave States 77 

§ 94. Typical cases 78 

§ 95- Question discussed in Congress 73 

§ 96. Arrests by civil officers go 

§ 97. Denial of the use of jails in the District of Columbia 80 

§ 98. Abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia 82 

§ 99. Regulations against kidnapping ,"■ 2 

§ 100. Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Acts 83 

§ loi. Early propositions to repeal the acts 8 ^ 

§ 102. Discussion of the repeal bill in the House 84 

§ 103. Repeal bills in the Senate 85 

§ 104. The repeal act and the thirteenth amendment 86 

§ 105. Educating effect of the controversy 87 



viii Fugitive Slaves. 



APPENDICES. 

APPENDIX A. 

Page 
Colonial laws relative to fugitives 89 

APPENDIX B, 

National acts and propositions relative to fugitive slaves ( 1778-1854) 104 

APPENDIX C. 
National acts and propositions relating to fugitive slaves (1860-1864) 117 

APPENDIX D. 
List of important fugitive slave cases 124 

APPENDIX E. 
Bibliography of fugitive slave cases and fugitive slave legislation 129 ' 



INDEX 139 



CHAPTER I. 

LEGISLATION AND CASES BEFORE THE 
CONSTITUTION. 

§ I. Elements of colonial slavery. 

§ 2. Regulations as to fugitives (1640-1700). 

§ 3. Treatment of fugitives. 

§ 4. Regulations in New England colonies. 

§ 5. Escapes in New England : Attucks case. 
§ 6. Dutch regulations in New Netherlands. 

§ 7. Escapes from New Amsterdam. 
§ 8. Intercolonial regulations. 

§ 9. Intercolonial cases. 
§ ID. International relations. 

§ II. International cases. 
§ 12. Relations with the mother country. 
§ 13. Regulation under the Articles of Confederation (1781-1788). 

§ 14. Ordinance for the Northwest Territory (1787). 
§ 15. The Fugitive question in the Constitutional Conventions. 

§ I. Elements of colonial slavery. — By the middle of the seven- 
teenth century, the settlements made in America by the English, 
Dutch, and Swedes were arranged for the most part in a line 
of little colonies closely following the Atlantic coast. To the 
west, wide forests and plains, broken only by the paths of the 
Indian, stretched on to the Pacific ; while long intervals of un- 
populated country separated the colonists on the north from the 
French in Canada, and on the south from the Spaniards in 
Florida. 

In all the colonies thus grouped together, the system of slavery 
had already become well established, and with its institution the 
question of the escape and return of the slaves had necessarily 
arisen. The conditions of the country, both physical and social, 
gave unusual facilities for flight. The wild woods, the Indian set- 
tlements, or the next colony, peopled by a foreign race, and per- 
haps as yet without firmly estabhshed government, offered to the 
slave a refuge and possibly protection. Escape, therefore, as a 
peculiar danger, demanded peculiar remedies. Though it is the 
purpose of this monograph not so much to study the detail of 

[I] 



2 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch i. 

legislation or escape in the colonies as to deal with the period 
trom 1789 to 1865, a. slight sketch of the intercolonial laws and 
provisions which preceded and in part suggested later legislation 
will first be necessary. 

Almost immediately after the introduction of slavery, in 1619, 
we begin to find regulations made by the colonists upon this sub- 
ject. At first they applied solely to their own territory, but soon 
agreements were entered into among several colonies, or between 
a colony and the Indians or the French in Canada. These acts 
and agreements recognized not only the negro, as at a later period, 
but also the white and the Indian slave. There existed in some 
of the colonies of this time a peculiar class of white people, who 
received no wages, and were bound to their masters.^ Usually 
these redemptioners were laborers or handicraftsmen, but some- 
times they were persons of education who had committed a crime, 
and were sold according to law for a term of years, or for life. One 
of the class is curiously connected with the education of no less a 
person than George Washington. An unpublished autobiography 
of the Reverend John Boucher, who from 1760 to the Revolution 
was a teacher and preacher in Virginia, contains the following 
paragraph noticing the fact : — 

" Mr. Washington was the second of five sons, of parents dis- 
tinguished neither for their rank nor fortune. . . . George, who, 
like most people thereabouts at that time, had no other education 
than reading, writing, and accounts, which he was taught by a 
convict servant whom his father bought for a schoolmaster, first 
set out in the world as a surveyor of Orange County."^ 

§2. Regulations as to fugitives. — The earliest regulation upon 
this subject is found among the freedoms and exemptions granted 
by the West India Company, in 1629, "to all Patroons, Masters, 
or Private Persons" who would agree to settle in New Netherlands. 
The authorities promised to do all in their power to return to their 
masters any slaves or colonists fleeing from service.^ 

A little later, the Swedish colonists in Pennsylvania asked 
from their government the same privilege of reclaiming fugitives.* 
The preamble of an act against fugitives in East Jersey, in 1686, 
explains these provisions. They found that " the securing of such 

1 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, I. 295 

2 Nation, April 18, 1SS9. * Appendix A, No. i. 
* N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, XIII. 211. 



§§ 1-3-] Treatment of Fugitives. 3 

persons as Run away, or otherwise absent themselves from their 
master's lawfull Occasion," was "a material encouragement to such 
Persons as come into this country to settle Plantations and Popu- 
late the Province." 1 In many of the Southern colonies, as Mary- 
land and South Carolina, so severe were the acts against this class 
of bound colonists that a runaway might be declared outlawed, 
and might rightfully be killed by any person.^ 

§3. Treatment of fugitives. — From 1640 to 1700, laws were 
also passed in New Jersey, Maryland, South Carolina, and Virginia. 
It is not necessary to follow out the provisions here,^ but each 
of the Southern colonics, as in later regulations, provided most 
minutely for all possible cases. By a Virginia law of 1642, all per- 
sons who entertained runaways, whether slaves or hired freemen, 
were to be fined twenty pounds of tobacco for each night's hospi- 
tality. The fugitives were to add to their tenure of service double 
their time of absence, and on a second offence to be branded with 
the letter R "* 

A curious regulation in 1 660-1, in Virginia, provided that if 
a negro and white bound servant ran away together, since the 
negro's time of servitude was for life, and he was therefore inca- 
pable of making up his lost time, the white servant's punishment 
should be doubled by adding the negro's sentence to his own.'' 
Another regulation, entitled " How to Know a Runaway," com- 
manded that all recovered fugitives have their hair " cutt " close 
about their ears.*' 

Sometimes the penalties were even more severe, but the pro- 
cesses were much the same. A person who found a slave or 
vagabond without a pass usually took him before the next justice, 
who took cognizance of the captor's good service, and certified it 
in the next Assembly: the runaway was then delivered from con- 
stable to constable, until he was returned to his master. 

After 1700 the process grows yet more elaborate; for example, 
take a North Carolina law of 1741. The securer of a runaway 
was to have seven shillings and sixpence proclamation money, 
and for every mile over ten which he conducted the fugitive three- 
pence extra. When seized, runaways were to be whipped and 

1 Appendi.x A, No. 45. 

^ Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, I. 295. 

3 The texts will be iowwA post, Appendix A. * Appendix A, No. 6. 

5 Appendix A, No. 23. 6 Appendix A, No. 20. 



4 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonics. [Ch. i. 

placed in the county gaol. If the owner was known, he was notified 
and went for his slave; if not, a notice describing the runaway- 
must be placed upon the door of the court-house, and sent to 
the clerk or reader of each church or chapel within the county. 
They were required to post all such notices every Lord's day for 
two months in some convenient place near the church. At the 
end of this time, should no claimant appear, the slave must be sent 
from constable to constable, till the public gaol of the government 
was reached. There, upon consent of the court or of two justices, 
he might be sold to hire by the gaoler.^ The Maryland Archives 
record that in 1669 ten thousand pounds of tobacco were appro- 
priated to build one of these log-house gaols wherein fugitive 
servants might be lodged.^ 

§ 4. Regulations in New England colonies. — Let us turn now to 
the New England colonics. Here we must expect to find but few 
provisions, since the class of slaves and bound servants was so 
small that it could easily be controlled. The first law in Massa- 
chusetts Bay was passed in 1630, and was entitled, "An Act re- 
specting Masters, Servants, and Laborers." In accordance with 
the arbitrary methods of government then pursued, it included not 
only runaway servants, but also any persons who should " privily 
go away with suspicion of evil intention," and ordered the magis- 
trate " to press men, boats, or pinnaces," and " to bring them back 
by force of arms." A humane provision, usually wanting in South- 
ern laws, though also found in New Netherlands, declared that, 
whenever servants fled on account of the tyranny of their masters, 
they should be protected until measures for their relief could be 
taken.^ 

In Connecticut and New Hampshire similar laws were passed, 
and in 1707 Massachusetts Bay, in regulating the free negro 
population, enacted that every freeman or mulatto who should 
harbor a negro servant in his house without his owner's consent 
should pay five shillings for the use of the poor of the town.'* 

In those days, when bridges were few, the ferrymen were ap- 
parently much relied upon as agents to detect and apprehend 
runaways. In 17 14 we find that several negro slaves had been 
carried over ferries, and thus escaped out of Rhode Island. The 
Assembly therefore enacted that " no ferryman or boatman what- 

1 Iredell, 90; Appendix A, No. 73. - Maryland Archives, II. 224. 

3 Appendix A, No. 2. * Appendix A, No. 53. 



§§3-s] Escapes in New England. 5 

soever, within this colony, shall carry or bring any slave as afore- 
said over their ferries, without a certificate under the hands of 
their masters or mistresses, or some person in authority, upon the 
penalty of paying all costs and damages their said masters or 
mistresses shall sustain thereby: and to pay a fine of twenty 
shillings for the use of the colony for each offence, as aforesaid." 
All persons were also commanded to take up any slave they 
might find travelling about without a pass.^ 

§ 5. Escapes in New England: Attucks case. — Although we do 
not find records of fugitive slave cases tried at this time within 
the New England colonies, advertisements of runaways exist in 
sufficient numbers to prove that escapes were common. It seems 
probable, therefore, that the return of a slave when within his 
own colony was taken as a matter of course, and roused so little 
opposition, and required so simple a process at law, that matters 
concerning it would seldom find mention in the chronicles of the 
time. Here is a typical advertisement: — 

" Ran away from Samuel Gilbert of Littleton, an indentured Servant Boy, 
named Samuel Gilson, about 17 years old, of a middling Stature for his 
Age, and wears black curled Hair, he carried away with him a blue cloth 
Coat, a light colored Jacket with sleeves, one pair of worsted Stockings, 
two striped woolen Shirts, and one good linnen Shirt. He went away in 
company with a short thick set Fellow, who wore a green coat and a green 
Jacket double breasted, also a pair Indian green Stockings. Whoever shall 
take up and secure, or give information of said runaway, so that his master 
may find him again, shall receive a Reward of two dollars and all neces- 
sary charges from 

Samuel Gilbert. 

"All masters of vessels and others are cautioned against harboring," etc."^ 

Again a case interesting not only as an illustration of the 
customs of the time, but also because the fugitive himself bears 
a name known to history in another connection, is noticed in the 
Boston Gazette of 1750. Here is advertised as escaping, Octo- 
ber 2, 1750, from his master, William Browne of Framingham, 
Massachusetts, " A molatto fellow about twenty-seven years of 
age, named Crispus." After describing his clothing and appear- 
ance, a reward of ten pounds, old tenor, is cfiered for his return, 
and " all masters of vessels and others are cautioned against 

1 Appendix A, No. 57; Appendix D, No. 6. ^ Boston Gazette, Jan. i, 1770. 



6 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch. \. 

concealing said servant on penalty of law." ^ Tradition has it, 
however, that he was never arrested, but returned of his own 
accord after a short time, and was for the next twenty years a 
faithful servant.^ Then, in 1770, presumably while in town upon 
one of the expeditions he often undertook to buy and sell cattle 
for his master, he was drawn into the Boston Massacre of 
March 5/^ 

A somewhat famous case, which also occurred in Massachusetts, 
though many years later, may here be mentioned. About 1769 . 
one Rotch, a Quaker, and therefore probably opposed to slavery, 
received on board the whaler Friendship a young negro boy 
named Boston, belonging to the heirs of William Swain. At the 
end of the voyage his master, John Swain, brought action in the 
court of Nantucket against Captain Folger for the recovery of 
the slave; the jury, whether from lack of evidence or from 
sympathy cannot be determined, returned a verdict in favor of 
the defendant.'^ 

§ 6. Dutch regulations in New Netherlands, — The early New 
Netherlands regulations furnish many interesting provisions con- 
cerning fugitive servants. Apparently the servile class was nu- 
merous, and hard to govern. In the words of the ordinance of 
1640, " many servants daily run away from their masters, whereby 
the latter are put to great inconvenience and expense ; the corn 
and tobacco rot in the field, and the whole harvest is at a standstill, 
which tends to the serious injury of this country, to their masters' 
ruin, and to bring the magistracy into contempt." It was there- 
fore ordained that runaways must, at the end of their term of in- 
denture, serve double the time of their absence, and make good 
all loss and damage to their masters; while persons harboring 
fugitives were obliged to pay a fine of fifty guilders.^ 

§ 7. Escapes from New Amsterdam. — Within these Dutch colonies 
there is recorded a case of escape as early as 1659. Four men- 
servants of Comelis Herperts de Jager, of New Amsterdam, ran 
away to Manhattan. One of them soon returned, and in accord- 
ance with the regulation made in 1630 by the West India Com- 

1 Boston Gazette, Oct. 2, 1750; G. W. Williams, History of the Negro Race in 
America, I. 330. 

2 Liberator, March 16, i860. 

'^ W. C. Nell's Address at the Nineteenth Anniversary of Boston Massacre.. 
* Moore, Slavery in Massachusetts, 117. 
^ Appendix A, No 3; Appendix D, No. 10. 



§§5-S.] Dutch and Intercolonial Regulations. 7 

pany,^ requiring the return of fugitives in their various settlements, 
one of the officers of the colony sent to Manhattan an order to 
arrest and bring back the remaining three in chains.^ 

§ 8. Intercolonial reg^ulations. — It will be seen that most of the 
colonies considered some provision against runaways necessary 
to the welfare of the settlements. To secure such legislation in 
a single colony was a comparatively easy matter; but the un- 
organized and sparsely settled condition of the country rendered 
any intercolonial regulations difficult. 

The first formal agreement of this kind was arranged by the 
New England Confederation of Plymouth, Massachusetts, Con- 
necticut, and New Haven, in 1643. In their Articles of Confeder- 
ation was a clause which promised : " If any servant runn away 
from his master into any other of these confederated Jurisdiccons, 
That in such Case vpon the Certyficate of one Majistrate in the 
Jurisdiccon out of which the said servant fled, or upon other due 
proofe, the said servant shall be deliuered either to his Master or 
any other that pursues and brings such Certificate or proofe."^ 
This clause contains the earliest statement of the principles re- 
garding the treatment of fugitive slave cases, afterward carried 
out in the United States statutes of 1787, 1793, and 1850. There 
was no trial by jury, but the certificate of a magistrate was 
sufficient evidence to convict the runaway. 

It is probable, also, that the rendition of fugitives was con- 
sidered a duty incumbent upon all colonies, whatever their rela- 
tion to each other, since about this time we find an agreement 
made for the mutual surrender of fugitives between the Dutch 
at New Netherlands and the English at New Haven.* 

Not only did the slaves of the Dutch escape to the English 
colonies, but they often fled to the forests, where recovery must 
have been almost impossible unless the Indians could be induced 
to hunt them out. Curious rewards were sometimes offered. 
Maryland, in 1669, ordered that any Indian who shall apprehend a 
fugitive may have a " match coate," or its value.^ Virginia would 

1 See ante, § 2. 

2 N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, XIII. 23S ; Letter from Jacob Aldrich to Director 
Stuyvesant of New Netherlands, New Amstel, 14 May, 1659; Documentary History 
of N. Y. Colony, II. 556; Appendix D, No. 2. 

3 Appendi.x A, No. 8 . Oilman, History of the American People, 605. 

* N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, I. 342 ; Doyle, English in America, I. 391. 
^ Maryland Archives, II. 523. 



8 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch. i. 

give " 20 armes length of Roanoke," or its value,^ while in 
Connecticut " two yards of cloth " was considered sufficient in- 
ducement.2 We have record of several conferences upon this 
subject. Governor Burnett of New York asked his Indians to 
exert themselves in behalf of the Governor of Virginia, who had 
written to him about the escape of several of his negro servants to 
the mountains. The Indians promised their help in this and any- 
other search ; but as they seldom seem to have succeeded, it is 
probable that their sympathy was with the fugitives.^ Again 
Governor Burnett demanded the restoration of a certain Indian 
slave whom they had kidnapped from the English. The Indians 
acknowledged the fact, but they said that he was then sold to 
others, and nothing further could be done.'* 

Canada even in these early times seems also to have been a 
haven for fugitives. In 1705 New York passed an act, which was 
renewed in 171 5, to prevent slaves running away from frontier 
towns like Albany to Canada, because it was of great importance, 
they said, in time of war, " that no Intelligence be carried from 
the said city and county to the French in Canada." ° 

During all this time the Southern colonies, especially the 
Carolinas and Georgia, were also making many complaints in 
regard to the difficulty they had in recovering the fugitives, 
both Indian and negro, who were escaping in large numbers 
into Florida. There, among the Creek Indians and the Spanish 
at St. Augustine, they easily found refuge.^ This difficulty was, 
however, not remedied in colonial times, but continued long after 
the formation of the Federal Union, and in fact until the close 
of the Seminole war, in 1845. 

§ 9. Intercolonial cases. — When, as was often the case, no agree- 
ment upon the return of fugitives had been arranged between the 
colonies, the rendition of a slave depended wholly upon the 
state of feeling existing between the two peoples, and sometimes 
became an important question. Between the New England 
colonies no cases have been found recorded, although we infer 

1 Appendix A, No. 37. 

2 Acts and Laws of Connecticut, 229. 

3 N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, V. 637 ; Appendix D, No. 4. 
* N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, V. 793. 

6 Appendix A, Nos. 50, 59. 

6 Giddings, Exiles of Florida, 2S1 ; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Tower 
in America, I. 122. 



§§S-io.] Intercolonial Cases. 9 

that there must have been reason for the insertion of a fugitive 
slave clause in the Articles of Confederation of 1643.^ 

Of other early cases one of the most interesting is the escape 
from Virginia of four Englishmen belonging to the class of 
bound servants. They rowed in a small boat up the coast as far 
as Cape May, where they landed.^ They soon found themselves 
objects of suspicion with the people, and, as was a common prac- 
tice, took refuge among the Indians. About a year afterward 
their masters tracked them to their place of refuge, and captured 
two of them, but the others were again beyond reach. The In- 
dians, who evidently did not always befriend runaways, had just 
sold one of them, William Browne, to a Swede, and Browne, 
learning of his former master's appearance, had found oppor- 
tunity to escape. The fourth of the fugitives was still among the 
Mantas, and could not be secured. Of the two recaptured, one 
was returned without trouble, but the other, Turc, who had just 
entered the service of a certain Pieter Aldrich, resisted his captors. 
A struggle took place upon the boat in which they were carrying 
him away. After wounding three of his guards, he succeeded 
in making his escape, only to be recaptured almost immediately. 
When tried for the deed at New Amsterdam, he received a death 
sentence.^ In this case, one of the most complete in detail left 
to us, may be found, in the incidents of escape, pursuit, resistance, 
and final rendition, all the features of the later fugitive slave cases. 
It is also an example wherein the laws of the period, which re- 
quired the rendition of a bound white man in the same manner as 
a negro slave, were strictly carried out: and in the diverse fates 
of the four men we find instances probably typical of the fortunes 
of most fugitives of the time. 

§ 10. International relations. — The proximity of the French, 
Spanish, and Dutch settlements led to escapes from the colonies 
of one power into those of another. All were slaveholding com- 
munities, and there was no disposition to shield a slave because 
his lot was a hard one ; but the distrust and enmity between neigh- 
boring colonies owing allegiance to different sovereigns caused 
such escapes to lead to petty quarrels. There was no system of 
extradition treaties; in fact, there was as yet little international 

1 Ante, § 8. 

2 Letter from William Beekman to Director Stuyvesaiit, iu N. Y. Colonial Manu- 
scripts, XIII. 346; Appendix D, No. 3. 

3 N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, XIII. 346. 



lo Fugitive Slaves : — Colonics. [Ch. i. 

law. Fugitives were demanded as an act of comity, and some- 
times their delivery was refused. It was hardly a subject on 
which the home governments bestirred themselves. The colonies 
Avere left to make their own agreements, or to settle their own 
disagreements. 

§ II. International cases. — Thus far only those cases have been 
noticed wliich arose within and between colonies of the same 
nation. Let us now consider a very early case of disagreement 
between colonies of different nations, which occurred in 1646. 
The commissioners of the United Colonies made complaint to 
the Governor of New Netherlands that his Dutch agent at Hart- 
ford was harboring one of their Indian slaves. Soon after, Gov- 
ernor Stuyvesant was refused the return of some of his runaway 
servants from New Haven. Thereupon the angry Lords of the 
West India Company issued a proclamation commanding that 
there should be no rendition of fugitive slaves to New Haven. 
This provision continued in effect until Governor Elton sent back 
some of the fugitives to New Netherlands. It was then annulled, 
and a mutual agreement to return the runaways was entered into 
by the United Colonies and the Dutch. ^ Governor John Win- 
throp, in his History of New England, refers to the case, and says 
that Massachusetts Bay endeavored to bring about a reconciliation, 
and wrote to the Governor of New Netherlands intimating to him 
that " at their request he might send back the fugitives without 
prejudice to their right or reputation." ^ 

Maryland also found difficulty, from the readiness with which 
her servants could flee north to New Netherlands. In the State 
Archives may be found a letter sent by the authorities to the 
Governor of New Netherlands, as follows : — 

"Sir, — Some servants being lately fledd out of this colony, into yours, 
as is supposed, we could not promise o'selves from you that justice & faire 
correspondence betweene the two governments so needy bordering & w"^ 
are snortly like to be nearer neighbors in delaware bay, as to hope that 
vpon the receiving of these Ctres & the demand of the p'ties interessted 
you will remand to us all such apprentice servants as are or shall run out of 
this government into yours ; and will compell such other p'sons, as shall 
flie to you without a passe, being indebted or otherwise obnoxious to the 

1 Moore, Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts, 28; Doyle, English 
in America, I. 391 ; compare Appendix A, No. 14. 

- John Winthrop, History of New England from 1630 to 1649, p. 3S3; Appendix D, 
No. I. 



§§ IO-I2.] 



Inlcniational Cases. H 



justice of this place, to make such satisfaction to the parties endamaged by 
their unlawful departure, upon their complaints and proofe thereof, as you 
shall find justice to require. And you may promise yourself the like helpe 
and concurrence from this governm't in that or any other thing as shalbe in 
the power of it : And so we bid you heartilly farewell & rest. 
" To the ho'"'' the Governor of the New Netherlands." ^ 
In 1659 the Dutch had occasion to ask the same favor of Mary- 
land. Whether there had been trouble between the colonies since 
the earlier letter we do not know, but the spirit of the communica- 
tion was quite different. Instead of assurances of good will, and 
expressions of a belief in the certainty of peaceful return, the 
Dutch threatened, if their servants were not secured to them, 
"to publish free liberty, access and recess to all planters, ser- 
vants, negroes, fugitives, and runaways which may go into New 
Netherland." ^ 

Trouble was also constantly arising between the French and 
English, or French and Dutch, in regard to the many runaways 
who fled from the Eastern colonies northward to Canada. In 
1750 there was a dispute about a certain negro belonging to the 
English, but at that time in possession of the Sieur de la Corne 
St. Luc ; and, in a letter to a friend, one of the officers of the 
colony makes the following explanation concerning them : " In 
reo-ard to the negro in possession of Sieur de la Corne St. Luc I 
thought proper not to send him back every negro being a slave 
wherever he be. Besides, I am only doing what the English did 
in 1747. Ensign de Malbronne on board Le Screux had a negro 
servant who was at first taken from him; I took pains to reclaim 
him, but the English refused to surrender him on ground as 

above." ^ 

§ 12. Relations with the mother country. — With only one country 
across the sea was any question of fugitives likely to arise. In 
England white slavery had long since died out, except as a pun- 
ishment for crime; villeinage ceased about the time the colonies 
were settled. But the status of black slaves who were taken 
from the colonies to England was in practice unchanged. 

The principle thus apparently established by custom was over- 
thrown by a succession of legal decisions, culminating in the 

1 Archives of Maryland, Proceedings of Council, 1636-1667, pp. 134, 135. 
'^ Archives of Maryland, Proceedings of Council, III. 472. 

3 Letter from M. de la Jonquiere to M. de Rouille, in N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, 
X. 209; Appendix D, No. 5. 



12 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch. i. 

famous Somersctt Case. It was first decided by Thomas Gra- 
hame, judge in the Admiralty Court, Glasgow, that a certain negro 
who had been brought into Great Britain must be hberated, on 
the ground that a guiltless human being taken into that country 
must be free.-^ In 1762 occurred another similar case. A bill had 
been filed in equity by an administrator to recover money given 
by his intestate to a negro brought to England as a slave. The 
suit was dismissed by Lord Northington, who said that as soon 
as a man set foot on English ground he was free.^ 

The Somersett case came ten years later. The circumstances 
were as follows. A Mr. Stewart, accompanied by his slave 
Somersett, left Boston on the ist of October, 1769, and went to 
London, where he kept his slave until October i, 1771. Then 
Somersett ran away, but his owner soon secured him and had him 
placed on board a vessel bound for Jamaica, probably with the 
intention of selling him as a slave. A writ of habeas corpus was 
then served upon the captain of the ship, and on the hearing 
Lord Mansfield decided that Somersctt must be discharged. In 
England, he said, slavery could exist only by positive law; and 
in default of such law there was no legal machinery for depriving 
a man of his liberty on the ground that he was a slave. The 
importance of the case for the colonies lay not in the assertion 
of the principle that slavery depended on positive law, for the 
American statute-books were full of positive law on slavery; the 
precedent thus established determined the future course of Eng- 
land against the delivery of fugitives, whether from her colonies 
or from other countries.^ 

§ 13. International regulations under the Articles of Confederation 
(1781-1788). — When, on March i, 1781. the Articles of Confedera- 
tion went into effect, the only action taken by the United States 
on the subject of fugitives had been the negotiation of a treaty 
with the Delaware Indians, August 7, 1778, by which the parties 
bound themselves not " to protect in their respective States 
criminal fugitives, servants, or slaves, but the same to apprehend, 

1 Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, Third Series, IX. 2; Appendix D, 
No. 7. 

^ J. Quincy, Reports of Cases, 96 : Appendix D, No. 8. 

3 Moore, Slavery in Massachusetts, 117 ; T. R. Cobb, Historical .Sketch of Slavery, 
2, Law of Negro Slavery, 164; Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, Third 
Series, IX. 2; Josiah Quincy, Reports of Cases, 96; Hurd, Law of Freedom and 
Bondage, II. 



§5 12-14. 



English Law. Northzvcst Ordinance. 13 



secure, and deliver." ^ In seven of the eight other treaties nego- 
tiated with Indian tribes from 1784 to 1786, clauses were intro- 
duced for the return of black prisoners, or of " negroes and other 
property." ^ The States affected were chiefly Southern ; but the 
article on the same subject in the Treaty of Peace in 1782 and 
1783, was intended as much to protect the slaveholders of New 
York as those of Virginia. It was distinctly agreed that the 
British should not carry away " any negroes or other property." ^ 
The failure to abide by this agreement led to reclamation by the 
American government, but no indemnity was ever secured.'^ 

§ 14. Ordinance for the Northwest Territory. — Since all the thir- 
teen colonies recognized slavery, the Revolution made no differ- 
ence in any previous intercolonial practice as to the delivery of 
slaves; in framing the Articles of Confederation no clause on the 
subject was thought necessary. The precedent of the New Eng- 
land Confederation was forgotten or ignored. But the action of 
the States of Vermont, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Connecticut, 
and Rhode Island, in taking steps toward immediate or gradual 
emancipation, from 1777 to 1784, brought up a new question, — 
the status of fugitives in free regions. Before the change of con- 
ditions in the States was completely understood, the same question 
had arisen in the Western territories. Jefferson, in 1784, proposed 
to draw a north and south line through the mouth of the Kanawha, 
west of which there should be no slavery after 1800.^ The next 
year a Northern man proposed a similar limitation in the territory 
north of the Ohio, and added a clause for the return of fugitive 
slaves to the original slave States.^ Neither of these two propo- 
sitions was carried, but the principles both of exclusion of slavery 
and of the return of fugitives appear in the Northwest Ordinance 
of 1787, the first legislation by Congress looking toward the sur- 
render of fugitives by any Territory or State. In providing a 
government for the new Territory, it was enacted, July 13, 1787, 
that " any person escaping into the same from whom labor or 
service is lawfully claimed in any one of the original States, 
such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the 

1 Appendix B, No. i. ^ Appendix B, Nos. 3, 5. 

3 Appendix B, No. 2. * Post, § 22. 

5 Randall, Jefferson, I. 397-400; Winsor, VII. 528; Journals of Congress, IX. 

153-156- 

<5 Appendix B, No. 4; Journals of Congress, X. 79; Bancroft, History of the U. S. 
(last rev.), VI. 132-134; Bancroft, Constitution, I. 178-180; Hildreth, III. 45S. 



14 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch. i. 

person claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid." ^ The 
fugitive clause seems to have provoked no discussion, but to have 
been accepted as a reasonable condition of the limitation ol 
slavery. 

§ 15. The Fugitive question in the Constitutional Conventions. — 
While the Northwest Ordinance was passing through Congress, 
the Philadelphia Convention was framing a new Constitution, and 
the return of fugitives was again eagerly insisted upon by the slave 
States. The necessity of some positive stipulation that fugitives 
should be returned was felt to be even more necessary in a Consti- 
tution meant permanently to bind together a free and a slavehold- 
ing section. The only debate of which we have a record occurred 
August 28, 1787. Mr. Butler of North Carolina pressed the point 
in behalf of the Southern States. To his first proposition, "that 
fugitive slaves and servants be delivered up like criminals,"^ Mr. 
Wilson objected ; he saw no reason for obliging the state to 
arrest fugitives at public expense, while Mr. Sherman saw no 
more propriety in the public seizing and surrendering a slave or 
servant than a horse.^ Mr. Butler therefore withdrew the propo- 
sition. He soon introduced a more particular provision, which 
was accepted and inserted in the Constitution, as follows : — 

" No PERSON HELD TO SERVICE OR LAHOUR IN ONE STATE, 
UNDER THE LAWS THEREOF, ESCAPING INTO ANOTHER, SHALL, 

IN Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be 

DISCHARGED FROM SUCH SERVICE OR LABOUR, BUT SHALL BE 
DELIVERED UP ON CLAIM OF THE PaRTV TO. WHOM SUCH SER- 
VICE OR Labour may be due."* 

In the various Constitutional Conventions, there was little dis- 
cussion upon the matter. The Southern States in general con- 
sidered the clause sufficient to protect their property. General 
Charles C. Pinckney, in South Carolina, said : " We have obtained 
the right to recover our slaves in whatever part of America they 
may take refuge, which is a right we have not had before. In 
short, considering all circumstances, we have made the best 
terms for the security of this species of property it was in our 
power to make. We would have made better if we could, but on 

1 Appendix B, No. 6. On the Northwest Ordinance in general, see Winsor, VII. 
538; J. H. Merriam, Legislative History of the Ordinance of 1787 (Worcester, 188S) ; 
Lalor's Cyclopasdia, III. 30-34. 

^ Elliot's Debates, V. 4S7. » Ibid., V. 4S7. 

* Appendix B, No. 7. 



§§14-15] Fugitive Question in Constitutional Conventions. 15 

the whole I do not think them bad."^ In North Carohna, Mr. 
Iredell explained to the Convention that the Northern delegates, 
owing to their peculiar scruples on the subject of slavery, did not 
choose the word " slave " to be mentioned ; but since the present 
laws were so prejudicial to the inhabitants of the Southern States, 
some such clause was necessary.^ In Virginia, Mr. Grayson dis- 
cussed the provision giving Congress exclusive legislation over 
ten square miles surrounding the capital. It seemed to him that, 
unless the ten miles square be considered a State, "persons bound 
to labor who shall escape thereto will not be given up. For they 
are only to be delivered up after they shall have escaped into a 
State." ^ This objection, though perfectly good at the time, was 
later overcome by the adoption by Congress of the laws of Mary- 
land for the regulation of the District of Columbia, whereby it 
was made slave territory. Mr. Mason did not think the clause 
provided sufficiently for the protection of their slaves,* but Mr. 
Madison urged its adoption, as a better security than anything 
they then had.^ 

In the North, there was apparently no discussion upon this 
article. Everywhere, however, it was thought that without such a 
clause the Southern States would not consent to the Union, and, 
in a spirit of compromise, the provision was accepted. 

1 Elliot's Debates, III. 277. 2 ibid., III. 182. 3 ibid., III. 401. 

* Ibid., III. 428. 5 Ibid., III. 335. 



CHAPTER II. 
LEGISLATION FROM 1789 TO 1850. 

§ 16. Effect of the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution. 
§ 17. The first Fugitive Slave Act (1793). 

§ 18. Discussion of the first act. 
§ 19. Propositions of 1797 and 1S02. 

§ 20. Propositions from 1817 to 1822. , 

§ 21. Period of the Missouri Compromise (1819-1822). 
§ 22. Status of the question from 1823 to 1847. 

§ 23. Canada and Mexico places of refuge. 

§ 24. Status of fugitives on the high seas. 
§ 25. Kidnapping from 1793 to 1850 : Prigg case. 
§ 26. Necessity of more stringent fugitive slave provisions. 
§ 27. Action of Congress from 1847 to 1850. 
§ 28. Slavery in the District of Columbia. 
§ 29. The second Fugitive Slave Act (1850). 

§ 30. Provisions of the second Fugitive Slave Act. 

§ 31. Arguments for the bill. 

§ 32. Arguments against the bill. 

§ 1 6. Effect of the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution. — By 

obtaining in the Constitution the insertion of a clause requiring 
the return of fugitives, a great step for the advancement of the 
interests of slavery had been taken. For this embodiment in the 
Constitution ever afterward formed a basis for the slaveholder's 
argument that the Constitution recognized and defended slavery, 
and was a justification to Northern men in their support of the 
later fugitive slave laws. 

Although the clause did not in terms apply to the Territories, 
the Ordinance of 1787 was, on August 7, 1789, confirmed in terms 
which by implication continued the sixth article, including the 
rendition of slaves ; ^ and in the earliest treaties made by the 
United States with Indian tribes, under the new Constitution, 
the return of negroes was expressly required.^ 

§ 17. The first Fugitive Slave Act (1793). — For some time, how- 
ever, the provision of the Constitution remained unexecuted; and 

1 Statutes at Large, I. 50. 2 Appendix B, No. 8. 

[16] 



§§ 16-17.] TJic First Fugitive Slave Act. 17 

it is a striking fact that the call for legislation came not from the 
South, but from a free State ; and that it was provoked, not by 
fugitive slaves, but by kidnappers. The case seemed to suggest 
that an act of Congress was necessary, more definite in condi- 
tions and detail than the provision of the Constitution. 

A free negro named John was seized at Washington, Pennsyl- 
vania, in 1791, and taken to Virginia. The Governor of Penn- 
sylvania, at the instigation of the Society for the Abolition of 
Slavery, asked the return of the three kidnappers ; but the Gov- 
ernor of Virginia replied that, since there was no national law 
touching such a case, he could not carry out the request.^ 

On the matter being brought to the notice of Congress by the 
Governor of Pennsylvania,^ a committee, consisting of Mr. Sedg- 
wick, Mr. Bourne of Massachusetts, and Mr. White, was appointed 
in the House of Representatives to bring in a bill or bills "pro- 
viding the means by which persons charged in any State with 
treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, shall, 
on the demand of the executive authority of the State from which 
they fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having juris- 
diction of the crime; also providing the mode by which a person 
held to service or labor in one State under the laws thereof, escaping 
into another, shall be delivered up on the claim of the party to 
whom such service or labor may be due,"^ 

A bill prepared by the House committee, of which Mr. Sedg- 
wick was chairman, was reported, November 15, 1791;* but for 
some reason which does not appear, it was dropped, and a Senate 
committee, of which Calvert was chairman, was appointed, March 
30, 1792, "to consider the expediency [of] a bill respecting fugi- 
tives from justice and from the service of their masters." ^ Noth- 
ing was done during this session, and, November 22, 1792, a second 
Senate committee was appointed, consisting of Johnston, Calvert, 
and Read,6 and they submitted a bill, December 20, 1792.^ Un- 
fortunately, we have no details of the debate; but on December 28, 

1 Cong. Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., Appendix, 1585 . Annals of Cong., 2 Cong. I Sess., 
H. of R., 147. 

2 State Papers, Miscellaneous, I. 39-43. 

3 House Journal, 2 Cong, i Sess., 444; Annals of Cong., 148. 
* House Journal, 2 Cong, i Sess., 454 ; Annals of Cong., 179. 

5 Senate Journal, 170; Annals, 115. 

6 2 Cong. 2 Sess., Senate Journal, 460 ; Annals of Cong, 616. 
' Senate Journal, 16; Annals, 622. 



1 8 Fugitive Slaves: — National Legislation. [Ch ii. 

a third Senate committee was appointed by adding Taylor and 
Sherman to the committee of November 22, and to them the bill 
was recommitted with instructions to amend.^ At last, January 3, 
1793, the bill was reported in a form not unlike that finally agreed 
upon.- Of the amendments offered, the text of only one is 
preserved in the Journals ; it was for the insertion of a less sum 
than five hundred dollars as the penalty for harboring a fugitive, 
or resisting his arrest.^ It was not adopted. After two debates, 
of which we have no record, the bill passed the Senate, January 18.* 
In the House it seems to have elicited little discussion, and it 
passed, February 5, by a vote of 48 to ^.^ The bill became law 
by the signature of the President, February 12, 1793.'' 

In thus uniting with the clause providing for the extradition of 
fugitives from justice one requiring the return of fugitive slaves. 
Congress was but following examples set in 1643 by the Articles 
of Confederation,'^ and again in 1787 by the Constitution.^ From 
the scanty records, it is possible to discern only that there was 
serious difference of opinion in the Senate, and that the measure 
finally adopted was probably a compromise. In the one amend- 
ment stated, there is a faint protest against the harshness of the 
law.^ 

§ 18. Discussion of the first act. — The provisions of the act of 
1793 are quoted elsewhere ; ^*^ their purport was as follows. The 
act provided at the same time for the recovery of fugitives from 
justice and from labor; but the alleged criminal was to have a 
protection through the requirement of a requisition, a protection 
denied to the man on trial for his liberty only. The act was appli- 
cable to fugitive apprentices as well as to slaves, a provision of 
some importance at the time. In the Northwest Territory there 

1 Senate Journal, 25, 26 ; Annals, 623. ^ Senate Journal. 2S ; Annals, 625. 

3 Senate Journal, 35 ; Annals, 630. * Senate Journal. 34, 35 ; Annals, 630. 

6 House Journal, 105 ; Annals, 861. ^ Appendix B, No. 9. 

7 Ante, § 8 ; Appendix A, No. 8, ^ Ante, § 15. 

9 For general discussions of the act, see Von Hoist, Constitutional History, I. 309- 
315; Hildreth, History of the U. S , IV. 406-440; Lalor's Cyclopaedia, II. 315-316; 
Stephens, War between the States, I. 629-636, 674; Bancroft's History of the U. S. 
(last revision), VI. 309, 310; Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery. 227; Curtis, History 
of the Constitution, II. 450-467; Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II. 142; Story, 
Commentaries, HI. 673-678 ; McMaster, History of the American People, I. 508, II. 
356, 357 ; Elliott's Debates, V. 357, 4S7 ; Schouler, History of the U. S , I. 219, 220; 
Tucker, History of the U. S-, I. 500. 

1'^ Appendix B, No. 9. 



§§ 17-19] Propositions of 1797 and 1802. 19 

were so-called negro apprentices, who were virtually slaves, and 
to whom the law applied, since it was in terms extended to all the 
Territories. Proceedings began with the forcible seizure of the 
alleged fugitive. 

The act, it will be observed, does not admit a trial by jury. It 
allowed the owner of the slave, his agent or attorney, to seize the 
fugitive and take him before any judge of a United States Cir- 
cuit or District Court, or any local magistrate. ^ The only require- 
ment for the conviction of the slave was the testimony of his 
master, or the affidavit of some magistrate in the State from which 
he came, certifying that such a person had escaped. Hindering 
arrest or harboring a slave was punishable by a fine of five hun- 
dred dollars. The law thus established a system allowing the 
greatest harshness to the slave and every favor to the master. 
Even at that time, when persons might still be born slaves in New 
York, and New Jersey, and gradual emancipation had not yet 
taken full effect in Rhode Island and Connecticut, it was repellent 
to the popular sense of justice; there were two cases of resistance 
to the principle of the act before the close of 1793.^ 

§ 19. Propositions of 1797 and 1802. — Until 1850 no further law 
upon this subject was passed, but as the provisions of 1793 were 
found ineffectual, many attempts at amendment were made. In 
1796 a troublesome question arose out of the seizure, under the 
act of 1793, of four negroes who had been manumitted in North 
Carolina. A retroactive act of that State had declared them 
slaves again, and they had fled to Philadelphia where they were 
arrested. January 30, 1797, they petitioned Congress for relief, 
and after an exciting debate the House by a vote of 50 to 33 
refused to receive the petition.^ There is nothing in the scanty 
records which connects this case or petition with an attempt to 
amend the act; but it is altogether likely that it occasioned Mur- 
ray's motion of December 29, 1796, for a committee to report on 
alterations of the law; * and that it led to the almost simultaneous 
appointment of a House committee on January 2,^ and a Senate 
committee on January 3.® No report is recorded. 

1 Fosf, § 27. 2 Post, §§ 34, 35. 

8 Annals of Congress, 1796-97, p. 2015, and 1S01-2, p. 343. 

* House Journal, 4 Cong. 2 Sess., 65; Annals of Cong., 1741, 1767. 

5 Murray, Cooper, and Kiltera. Annals of Cong., 1767. 

6 Sedgwick, Reed, and Henry. Senate Journal, 4 Cong. 2 Sess., 39 ; Annals of 
Cong., 1528. 



20 Fugitive Slaves: — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. 

The coming on of difficulties with France, and the AHen and 
Sedition Acts of 1798, absorbed the popular attention. In 1800 
debates on the slave trade and on the reception of petitions from 
free negroes began. January 22, 1801, a House committee was ap- 
pointed to report a bill increasing the stringency of the act.^ The 
bill was reported, but failed to be considered.^ In the next Con- 
gress the matter was at last brought to an issue. A committee, 
of which Nicholson of Maryland was chairman, was appointed, 
December 11, 1801,^ and reported only seven days later. The 
report was made a special order for December 21.* On that day 
no debate is recorded, but a petition from a free colored soldier of 
the Revolution was contemptuously denied reception.^ January 14 
and 15, the bill was debated freely, and from the debate and sun- 
dry amendments the character of the bill may be inferred. Not 
only harboring, but employing a fugitive, was made punishable; 
and it was ordained that every black employed must be furnished 
with an official certificate, and that every person who employed a 
negro must publish a description of him. Southern members 
" considered it a great injury to the owners of that species of prop- 
erty, that runaways were employed in the Middle and Northern 
States, and even assisted in procuring a living. They stated that, 
when slaves ran away and were not recovered, it excited discon- 
tent' among the rest. When they were caught and brought home, 
they informed their comrades how well they were received and 
assisted, which excited a disposition in others to attempt escaping, 
and obliged their masters to use greater severity than they other- 
wise would. It was, they said, even on the score of humanity, 
good policy in those opposed to slavery to agree to this law."^ 
This appeal to the humanity of the North failed to produce the 
requisite effect. On the test vote, January 18, 1802, every South- 
ern member except two voted for the bill, every Northern member 
except five against it ; the vote was 43 to 46, and the bill was laid 
aside.' 

1 Appendix B, No. 10. 

2 House Journal, 6 Cong. 2 Sess., 220; Annals of Cong., 1053. 

8 Nicholson, Goddard, Holland, J. Smith (Va), Lowndes. House Journal, 7 Cong. 
I Sess., 34 ; Annals of Cong., 317. 

* House Journal, 7 Cong, i Sess., 45 ; Annals of Cong., 335. 
6 Annals of Cong., 343. 

6 House Journal, 7 Cong, i Sess., 125; Annals of Cong., 422, 423; Appendi.x B, 
No. 10. 

7 House Journal, 7 Cong, i Sess., 125, 12S; Annals of Cong., 423, 425. 



§§19-20.] Propositions from 1817 to 1822. 2i 

§ 20. Propositions from 1817 to 1822. — For many years the ques- 
tion of amendment of the law does not appear to have come up 
in Congress. The abohtion of the slave trade seems to have ab- 
sorbed the attention of Congress. Several treaties were nego- 
tiated including clauses on the return of fugitives.^ The question 
was brought up again in 1817 by Pindall of Virginia, who for 
several years urged a revision of the act. A committee of which 
he was chairman was appointed, December 15, 181 7, and reported 
a bill, December 29, 18 1/.^ This third proposition of general 
amendment led to a debate, January 26 and 29, 1818, in which for 
the first time we have a record of discussion on the principles of 
the act and its relations to human freedom. The opposition was 
based not only on constitutional, but on humanitarian grounds.^ 
A petition of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, asking for a 
milder law than that of 1793, added fuel to the discussion.* 

The principle of the bill was that the fugitives should be sur- 
rendered by a requisition on the State Executive, as in the case of 
fugitives from justice : the question of proof was thus left to the 
courts of the State of the claimant, and there was to be no habeas 
corpus. The strongest expression of disapproval is found in the 
speech of Mr. Adams of Massachusetts, who said, "that, in guaran- 
teeing the possession of slaves, the Constitution did not authorize 
or require the General Government to go as far as the bill pro- 
posed to render this bill effectual; that the bill contained pro- 
visions dangerous to the liberty and safety of the free people of 
color in other sections of the Union." ^ Mr. Rich of Vermont de- 
sired " that it might be so amended as to guard more effectually 
the rights of free persons of color. This motion he enforced by 
urging the oppressions to which these persons M^ere now subjected, 
and the necessity of some regulation on the subject, which he 
thought might be very properly connected with this bill."^ Mr. 
Livermore also showed that it exposed the colored men of the 
North to the peril of being dragged South, and there convicted.^ 

All these objections, however, were considered of little value 
by some who, like Smith of Maryland, thought that the subject of 

1 Post, § 22. 

2 House Journal, 15 Cong, i Sess., 50, S6, 182, 1S6, 189, 193, 198; Annals of Cong., 
446, 447. 513. 819. 829, S3 1, 840, 1339, 1393. 

3 Appendix B, No. 13. * Annals of Cong., S29. 
_ & Annals of Cong., 838. 

6 Aiinals of Cong., 15 Cong, i Sess., 829, 830. '^ Annals of Cong., 838. 



22 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. 

the free colored population and their protection should be treated 
separately, while Mr. Holmes of Massachusetts suggested that the 
operation of the writ of habeas corpus would render such acts of 
injustice improbable.^ Mason, of the same State, objected to a 
trial by jury, which had been suggested, because "juries in Massa- 
chusetts would in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred decide in 
favor of the fugitives, and he did not wish his town [Boston] in- 
fected with the runaways of the South." ^ 

Upon two constitutional points the opponents of the bill made 
a stand. Mr. Sergeant wished to change the bill materially, by 
making " the judges of the State in which . . . slaves are seized the 
tribunal to decide the fact of slavery, instead of the judges of the 
State whence the fugitives escaped," but this was negatived by a 
large majority.^ 

Another objection to the bill, raised by Mr. Whitman, is note- 
worthy, since some years later it was the point made most promi- 
nent in Judge Story's decision in the Prigg Case.* Mr. Whitman 
disapproved of the provision making it a penal offence for a State 
officer to refuse his assistance in executing the act. He did not 
believe that Congress had any right to compel State officers to 
perform this duty; they could do no more than authorize it.^ 

A vote was taken, January 30, 18 18, in the House, and the bill 
passed by a vote of 84 to 69.^ It was ordered that the title be "An 
Act to provide for delivering up persons held to labor or service 
in any of the States or Territories who shall escape into any other 
State or Territory." 

For the first time since 1793, amendment of the act seemed 
within reach. The Senate showed itself in other questions more 
inclined than the House to consider the claims of the South ; but 
although Dagget's amendment to strike out the elaborate pro- 
vision for the return of fugitives by executive requisition was not 
adopted,*" the Senate first voted to limit the bill to four years,^ 
and then added other amendments. The result was a non-con- 
currence with the House, and the failure of the bill,^ March 

1 Annals of Cong., S38. 2 Annals of Cong., S38. 

8 Appendix B, No. 13. * Post, § 25. 

6 House Journal, 15 Cong, i Sess., 19S ; Annals of Cong., 840. 
8 Appendi.K B, No. 14. 
'' Appendix B, No. 15. 

8 Senate Journal, 15 Cong, i Sess., 12S, 135, 174, 202, 227, 22S, 233; House Jcur^al, 
328; Annals of Cong., 165, 210, 259, 262, 1339. 



§§20-21.] Period of tJie Missouri Compromise. 23 

13-16, 1818. A last attempt to take the bill up failed, April 10, 
1818.1 

§ 21. Period of the Missouri Compromise (1819-1822). — The loss 
of the bill of 18 18 seems not to have discouraged the friends of 
amendment of the act of 1793. December 17, 1818, a resolution 
of the Maryland legislature was laid before the House, calling for 
protection against the citizens of Pennsylvania who harbored or 
protected fugitives.^ A committee was appointed, January 15, 
1 8 19, which promptly reported next day, but the bill was not 
considered.'^ 

The question of fugitives came incidentally into the great debate 
of the next session on the admission of Missouri. The region 
which sought admission as a slave State was flanked on the east 
by free territory, and was therefore peculiarly difficult to protect. 
A compromise, which made Missouri a slave State, prohibited 
slavery in all other territory gained from France north of 36'' 30'.^ 
In the prohibitory clause, however, it was provided " that any 
persons escaping into the same from whom labor or service is law- 
fully claimed in any State or Territory of the United States, such 
fugitive may be reclaimed, and conveyed to the person claiming 
his or her labor or service as aforesaid." ^ During the immigra- 
tion into Missouri which now began, large numbers of slaveholders 
took their slaves with them, and on the passage opportunities for 
escape were often found. In one instance, at least, recorded in 
Ohio, the public sympathy was so strongly with the fugitives 
that they were successfully protected from their masters even 
in court." 

Hardly was the ink dry on the President's signature of the 
Missouri Compromise (March 15, 1820) before propositions were 
made in both the House and Senate for new general fugitive 
slave acts. March 18, a House committee was appointed,'^ but 
no report is recorded. April 3, an inquiry was set on foot into 
the provisions of a Pennsylvania act hindering the operation of 
the act of 1793,^ and the Secretary of State submitted a copy of 

^ Annals of Cong., 1716. 2 cf_ Appendix B, No. 17. 

>* House Journal, 15 Cong, i Sess., 18S, 191 ; Annals of Cong., 546, 551. 
* Annals of Cong., 16 Cong, i Sess., 469, 1587. 

5 Appendix B, No. 16. 

6 Liberator, Jan. 24, 1S40 (N. Y. Evening Post). 

■^ House Journal, 16 Cong, i Sess., 427; Annals of Cong., 1S63. 
8 Appendix B, No. 18. 



24 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. 

the obnoxious act, April i8. On the day of the Secretary's report 
a proposition in the Senate to instruct the Judiciary Committee 
to report a bill was voted down.^ Positive evidence cannot be 
obtained, but it would seem that a continued effort was made to 
take advantage of the agitation on the slavery question to secure 
a new fugitive slave act, as was done in 1850. 

One more attempt was made in 1821-22. Mr. Wright pre- 
sented, December 17, 1821, a resolution of the Maryland General 
Assembly praying for relief against the abettors of the fugitives 
in Pennsylvania.'-^ He desired a special committee, but the ques- 
tion was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, which re- 
ported a bill, January 14, 1822.^ March 27 to April i, it was 
debated, but finally tabled.^ The character of the bill does not 
distinctly appear in the records. 

§ 22. Status of the question from 1823 to 1847. — Although no 
amendment could be procured to the act of 1793, the government 
of the United States had repeatedly, by diplomatic demands and 
treaties, undertaken to recover fugitives, or their value, for Southern 
owners. The first Indian treaty negotiated under the Constitution, 
that of April 7, 1790, with the Creeks, required the return of ne- 
groes held as prisoners of war.^ A similar clause appeared in the 
treaty made in 18 14, at the end of the war with the Creeks, a war 
which had been provoked in part by their ready reception of fugi- 
tives.*" In 1832 the government went so far as to promise to 
expend seven thousand dollars in paying for " slaves and other 
property alleged to have been stolen " by the Seminoles.^ 

With Great Britain, also, the encouragement of fugitives became 
a subject for negotiation. Much bitterness had been felt at the 
carrying away by the British, in 1783, of slaves who had taken 
refuge with theni.^ In the treaty of Ghent, therefore, a strict 
clause forbade the carrying away by the British of " any slaves 
or other private property."^ A large number of slaves had, dur- 
ing the war, been received on board British vessels, and the hu- 
mane but specious plea was set up by the British government that 

1 Senate Journal, 16 Cong, i Sess., 319, 326; Annals of Cong., p. 618. 

- Appendi.v B, No. 18. 

^ House Journal, 17 Cong, i Sess., 143; Annals of Cong., 553, 55S, 710. 

* Annals of Cong, 17 Cong, i Sess., 1379, 1415, 1444- 

^ Appendix B, No. 8. c Appendix B, No. ir. 

^ Appendix B, No. 19. 8 Ante, § 13; Appendix B, No. 2. 

8 Appendix B, No. 12. 



§§21-23-] Canada and Mexico Places of Refuge. 25 

the clause applied only to slaves received after the date of the 
peace. A convention of 1818 submitted the question to the Em- 
peror of Russia, who in 1822 made a decision not wholly favor- 
able to either party; and in 1826,^ by a second convention, Great 
Britain agreed to pay $1,204,960. This last award was obtained 
by a Pennsylvanian, Gallatin, acting under the direction of Presi- 
dent John Ouincy Adams, a citizen of Massachusetts. 

§ 23. Canada and Mexico places of refuge. — The existence on the 
northern and southwestern frontiers of regions in which slavery 
was practically, if not yet legally, extinct, brought about another 
set of complications. January 24, 182 1, a resolution was presented 
in Congress from the General Assembly of Kentucky, protesting 
against the kindly reception of fugitives in Canada, and asking for 
negotiation with Great Britain on the subject.^ In 1826, Mr. Clay, 
Secretary of State, instructed Mr. Gallatin, United States Minister 
at the Court of St. James, to propose the " mutual surrender of all 
persons held to service or labor under the laws of either country 
who escape into the territory of the other." The British govern- 
ment replied that any such agreement was impossible, and, though 
a second attempt was made by the United States, it was without 
success.^ 

In 1 841 Mr. Woodbridge submitted a resolution to the Senate 
requesting the Committee on Foreign Relations to consider the 
expediency of entering into an arrangement with Great Britain for 
the arrest of fugitive slaves charged with crime who might escape 
over the northern boundary of the United States.^ No action was 
taken upon the resolution. 

The North, however, was not the only region to which slaves 
were fleeing at this time. Complaint was heard after 1830, that 
the " freedom and equality granted blacks by the Mexican Con- 
stitution and law of 1829, was attracting large numbers of slaves 
from Louisiana," ^ while in Florida the Seminole trouble was not 
yet ended. 

The last case of this kind occurred just at the outbreak of the 
Civil War. A slave by the name of Anderson was found one 

1 Am. State Papers, Foreign, IV. 106-126, VI. 346-354. 

2 Annals of Cong., 16 Cong. 2 Sess., 94. 

3 S. G. Howe, Refugees from Slavery in Canada, 12-14; Niles's Register, XXIII. 
26, LV. 2S9. 

4 Appendix B, No. 21 ; cf. No. 24. 

5 Niles's Register, XXIII. 26. 



26 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii 

day by Mr. Seneca T. P. Diggs, wandering about his plantation in 
Howard County, Missouri, without a pass. Mr. Diggs thereupon 
arrested him as a fugitive slave. In the struggle which followed, 
the desperate runaway plunged a knife into Mr. Diggs's heart. 
His captor dead, Anderson hastened on to Canada.^ There he 
lived a quiet and industrious life until i860, when the American 
government called upon Canada, under the extradition treaty, to 
give up Anderson for punishment. He was arrested, but applied 
to the Toronto court for a writ of habeas corpus, which was re- 
fused. An appeal was immediately made to the Queen's Bench, 
England, which granted the writ.^ In the trial Anderson was de- 
fended by Mr. Gerrit Smith in an eloquent speech, which made a 
great impression, and was circulated all over the United States.' 
The prisoner was discharged on a technical point.'^ 

§ 24. Status of fugitives on the high seas. — When in 1830 gradual 
emancipation began in the British colonies, and in 1837 slavery 
ceased to exist there, a new set of complications arose. Amer- 
ican vessels carrying slaves from one part of the United States to 
another Avere repeatedly driven or conveyed into British ports, and 
the slaves were there treated as ordinary fugitives, that is, as free 
men. Thus the Comet in 1830,*^ and the Encomium in 1834,^ 
were cast away on the Bahamas, and the slaves on board could 
not be recovered. In 1835 the Enterprise was forced by stress of 
weather to enter a port of the Bermudas,'' and the officers were 
not permitted by the British authorities to restrain the persons on 
board. 

In none of these three casps were the negroes restored ; but in 
1840 the British government paid an indemnity for the first two 
cargoes, on the ground that at the time of the wrecks slavery had 
not yet been completely extinguished in the colonies.^ No in- 
demnity was allowed in the Enterprise case, and the British gov- 
ernment declared that it could assume no responsibility in cases 
arising since the abolition of slavery .^ Elaborate resolutions intro- 

i Liberator, Dec. 31, i860. 

2 Pamphlets on Anderson case, Boston Tublic Library; Appendix D, No. 65. 

3 Life of Gerrit Smith, 115. . * Liberator, Jan. 22, 1861. 

5 Von Hoist, IL 312 ; Calhoun, IIL 9, 464, 4S6 ; Senate Docs., 25 Cong. 3 Sess., 
No. 216. 

6 Wilson, Slave Power, I. 439-442 ; Congressional Globe, XIV. 50. 

■? Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery, 252, 253; Von Hoist, Calhoun, 204-209. 

8 House Docs., 27 Cong. 2 Sess., V., No. 242 ; Congressional Globe, XIV. 50. 

9 Senate Docs., 26 Cong, i Sess., HI., No. 11. 



§§ 23-25] Kidnapping from 1793 to 1850. Prigg Case. 27 

duced by Calhoun, March 4, 1840, and passed, April 15, by a unan- 
imous vote of the Senate, condemned the British principle.^ But 
when, in the next year, the slaves on board the American ship 
Creole rose and by force carried ht : into Nassau,^ the British gov- 
ernment refused to return them either as slaves or as murderers.^ 
Webster, as Secretary of State, strenuously urged the surrender. 
In 1853, an arbitrator decided that an indemnity must be paid to 
the American government.* On the other hand, when, in 1839, 
a Spanish vessel, L'Amistad, in which the slaves on board had 
revolted and killed their master, was brought into an American 
port, the Supreme Court refused to permit their surrender, on the 
ground that they were free by Spanish law, and therefore could 
not be tried for murder.^ 

§ 25. Kidnapping from 1793 to 1850: Prigg case. — Since slavery 
was now extinct in the more northern States, their population con- 
tained many free negroes. Upon them the eyes of the slave trader 
were often turned, as easy prey under the law of 1793, and many 
cases of kidnapping occurred. It was such instances, involving 
as they did the most manifest injustice and cruelty, that first 
aroused the sympathies of the people.^ The border States like 
Pennsylvania were often the scene of these acts. The neighboring 
white families first began to try to protect the negroes settled near 
them, and a little later to give a helping hand to those escaping 
from slavery, and at last, in the underground railroad,'^ to complete 
a systematic organization for the assistance of fugitives. Cases 
of kidnapping are recorded as early as 1808.^ In 1832 the carry- 
ing away of a black woman without process of law not only 
roused the people of Pennsylvania, but led to a decision which 
took away much of the force of the act of 1793. 

A slave woman, Margaret Morgan, had fled from Marylai^d to 
Pennsylvania. Five years later, in 1837, Edward Prigg, an attor- 
ney, caused her to be arrested and sent back to her mistress with- 
out recourse either to the national or State act on the subject. 
In the act he disregarded a law of Pennsylvania, brought about in 

1 Congressional Globe, XIV. 80, 113-118; Calhoun, III. 462 ; Appendix B, No. 20. 

2 Senate Docs., 27 Cong, i Sess., II., No. 51. 

3 Cobbett's Case, 47 ; Dana's Wheaton, note 62 ; cf. Appendix B, No. 23. 
* Lawrence's Wheaton, 207, n. 

^ Von Hoist, 1. 321, 322 ; Opinions of the Attorney Generals, III. 484 ; 15 Peters, 518. 

6 R. Smedley, Underground Railroad, 26. 

^ ScQ post, §§ 71-76. 8 See post, § 38. 



28 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. 

1826 through the efforts of the Society for the AboHtion of Sla- 
very, which forbade the carrying out of the State of any negro 
with the intention of enslaving him. Accordingly, Mr. Prigg was 
arrested and convicted in the county court. The Supreme Court 
of Pennsylvania sustained the decision. Thence the case was 
taken to the Supreme Court of the United States. There the 
counsel for Mr. Prigg argued that the statute of Pennsylvania on 
which the indictment was founded was unconstitutional, since it 
conflicted with the law of 1793. Justice Story delivered the opin- 
ion of the court, and upon this decision all future judgments were 
based. He aimounced that the law must be carried out through 
national authorities alone ; the States or State magistrates could 
riot be forced into action.^ After this, many States, seeing the 
advantage thus given them, passed laws which forbade the officers 
to aid in a fugitive slave case, and also denied the use of their jails 
for imprisonment.^ Plainly the Prigg case showed a growing in- 
disposition on the part of the States to carry out the law, however 
severe its provisions might be; and this disposition to evade its 
obligations is still further evidenced by the cases given in the next 
chapter. 

§ 26. Necessity of more stringent fugitive slave provisions. — The 
increasing number of rescues,^ and the occurrence of several cases 
of resistance, proved conclusively the inadequacy of the law of 
1793. After the Prigg decision the provisions made for its execu- 
tion through national powers were entirely insufficient. Underly- 
ing all these acts, the South also could but perceive a sentiment 
the growth of which, unless checked in some way, would at last 
permanently injure, if not destroy, their peculiar institution. 

§ 27. Action of Congress from 1847 to 1850. — P'rom 1822 until 1848 
apparently no effort was made to secure a new law. Then a peti- 
tion received in 1847 from the Legislature of Kentucky, urging the 
importance of passing such laws as would enable the citizens of 
slaveholding States to recover their slaves when they escaped into 
non-slaveholding States,* gave rise to a bill from the Committee 
on the Judiciary.^ The bill provided " for the more effectual exe- 

1 Appendix B, No. 22 ; 16 Peters, 957 ; Report of Case of Edward Prigg, Supreme 
Court of Pennsylvania, 202; Bledsoe, Liberty and Slavery, 355; J. F. Clarke, Anti- 
slavery Days, 69. 

2 Post, §§ 78, 79. 8 Post, §§ 34, 41, 42. 
* Senate Journal, 30 Cong., I Sess., 59; Congressional Globe, 51. 

^ Senate Journal, 30 Cong., i Sess., 313 ; Congressional Globe, 722. 



§§ 25-29.] TJie Second Fugitive Slave Act. 29 

cution of the third clause of the second section of the Fourth 
Article of the Constitution." ^ It passed only to the second" read- 
ing. In 1849, Mr. Meade proposed in the House to instruct the 
Committee on the Judiciary to report a fugitive slave bill.^ No 
report apparently was ever made, but this was the last ineffectual 
proposition. In 1850, a new law was successfully carried in both 
Houses. 

§ 28. Slavery in the District of Columbia. — During this period, 
from 1840 to 1850, the subject of slavery and fugitives in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia began to occasion debate, which was never 
long silenced. It was notorious that almost under the windows of 
the Capitol negroes were confined in public jails on the ground 
that they were fugitives ; and that a free negro so confined might 
be sold for his jail fees. Resolutions for an investigation of the 
condition of the jails were offered in 1848 by Mr. Giddings;^ 
and Mr. Hall also introduced more sweeping propositions to 
repeal all laws of Congress and of Maryland which authorized 
or required courts, officers, or magistrates to issue process for 
arrest or commitment to the jail of the District of any fugitive 
slave.* Congress, however, was in a mood too conciliatory 
toward the South to consider these propositions ; and no action 
was taken. 

§ 29. The second Fugitive Slave Act (1850). — In the early part of 
the first session of the Thirty-first Congress, Mr. Mason of Virginia 
introduced a bill to make the provisions of the fugitive slave act 
more severe,^ and the bill was reported from the Committee on the 
Judiciary, January 16, 1850. Two additional amendments were 
soon offered by Mr. Mason. The first imposed a fine of one thou- 
sand dollars and imprisonment for twelve months upon any one 
who should obstruct the execution of the law. The second pro- 
vided that the testimony of a fugitive should not be admitted. 
Mr. Seward, in opposition, proposed on the 28th to allow a fugi- 
tive the right of trial by jury, with a fine of five thousand dollars 

1 Senate Journal, 30 Cong, i Sess , 313; Congressional Globe, 722. 

2 Appendix B, No. 29. 

3 Appendix B, Nos. 25, 27, 28. 
* Appendix B, No. 26. 

5 Appendix B, No. 30. In this number of the Appendix is a summary of the legis- 
lative history of the measure, from the introduction of Mason's bill, Jan. 4, 1850, to the 
signature of the act by President Fillmore, Sept. 18, 1S50, with references to the records 
of Congress. 



30 



Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. 



[Ch. ii. 



and the forfeiture of office should the right be disallowed by any 
judge or marshal.^ 

Mr. Clay's " Omnibus Bill," by which he intended to settle the 
territorial question then before Congress, and at the same time to 
check the antislavery movement, contained a fugitive slave clause, 
though not so severe in its provisions as Mr. Mason's.^ This bill, 
however, was not debated as a whole, but each proposition con- 
sidered separately, and thus Mr. Mason's bill became the basis of 
the fugitive slave provision in the Compromise of 1850. 

The measure was considered, and various amendments were 
offered, until August 26, 1850, when it was passed by the Senate, 
and a few days later by the House ;^ the signature of President 
Fillmore was readily appended, and it became law, September 18, 
1850.4 

§ 30. Provisions of the second Fugitive Slave Act. — Every pro- 
vision of the act was arranged for the protection and benefit of 
the slaveholders. It was based upon the law of 1793, but a num- 
ber of new regulations were added.^ Commissioners were to be 
chosen by the Circuit Courts of the United States and the Supe- 
rior Courts of the Territories, to act with the judges of those courts 
in fugitive slave cases. Such commissioners could be fined one 
thousand dollars for refusing to issue a writ, and were liable for 
the value of any slave escaping from them. The testimony re- 

* Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., 236. 
- Senate Journal, 31 Cong, i Sess., 118. 

^ Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., 248; Appendix B, No. 6S. The test vote 
in the House stood as follows : — 



States. 


For. 


Against. 


Not voting. 


Total. 


New England States . . . 

Middle States 

Interior and Pacific States 

Total, Free States . . 

Border Slave States . . . 
Planter States 

Total, Slave States . 

Total 


7 
9 
16 


15 

33 
27 


10 
21 

S 


32 
63 
51 


32 

32 
45 


75 





39 

6 
9 


146 

38 

54 


17 





15 


92 


109 


75 


54 


23S 



* Appendix B, Nos. 83, 84. For general discussions of the act, see Von Hoist, III. 
548-557, IV. 9-12, 20-29; Wilson, Slave Power, II. 302-329; Greeley, American 
Conflict, I. 210-221; Cooley's Story, § 1921 ; Lalor's Cyclopjedia, II. 315-317; Bryant 
and Gay, U. S., IV. 397-401. 

^ For the text of the act, see Appendix B, No. 31. 



§§-9-31-1 Arguments for the Bill. 31 

quired for rendition was the official declaration of the fact of 
the escape of a slave by two witnesses, and the establishment of 
his identity by oath. The testimony of the accused could not 
be admitted. The right of trial by jury was not affirmed, and 
was therefore practically denied. A sheriff might call upon any 
bystander for help in executing the law, and the penalty for 
harboring or aiding in a rescue was increased from five hundred 
dollars, as in 1793, to one thousand dollars, and imprisonment for 
not more than six months. Should the slave escape, damages 
to the same amount were to be paid to the claimant. If a mob 
were feared, military force might be employed ; and by a discrim- 
ination little likely to win respect for the act, the fee of the com- 
missioner was to be increased from five to ten dollars whenever 
the case was decided in favor of the claimant. 

§ 31. Argviments for the bill. — The debate on the Fugitive Slave 
Bill more than any other part of the Compromise illustrates the 
character of the slavery conflict. Most of the Southern members 
urged the immediate necessity of a new law, but some of the 
more ardent considered the evil to be one which could be reached 
only through a change in public sentiment, and they thought all 
legislation valueless.^ Mr. Mason thus presented the evils with 
which the law must cope. He stated that the border States had 
found it an impossibility to reclaim a fugitive when he once got 
within the boundaries of a non-slaveholding State ; " and this bill, 
or rather the amendments, . . . have been framed with a great 
deal of consideration, to reach, if practicable, the evils which this 
experience has demonstrated to exist, and to furnish the appro- 
priate remedy in enabling the owner of a fugitive to reclaim 
him." Under the existing laws, " you may as well go down irito 
the sea and endeavor to recover from his native element a fish 
which has escaped from you, as expect to recover such a fugi- 
tive. Every difficulty is thrown in your way by tha population. . . . 
There are armed mobs, rescues. This is the real state of things. "^ 

Not only were the laws thus set aside by individuals, but also 
through the Underground Railroad an organized system of depre- 
dation was carried on, whereby thousands of dollars were every 
year lost to the slaveholder.^ As an illustration of the extent to 

1 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., Appendix, 1610. 

2 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., 15S3. 

3 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong. 2 Sess., Appendix, 1051. 



32 Fugitive Slaves: — National Legislation. [Ch ii. 

which this disregard of law was carried, Mr. Yulee, one of the 
most extreme of the Southern men, instanced a convention which 
was then in session in New York " for the very purpose, openly- 
avowed, of congratulation upon their successful violation of the 
Constitution in respect to fugitives, and to devise ways and means 
to encourage the escape of slaves." ^ 

Such, according to the Southern Congressmen, was the condi- 
tion of affairs. They then proceeded to contrast it with the situa- 
tion as contemplated by the Constitution, and supported by the 
decision of the Supreme Court in the Prigg case. Mr. Butler 
insisted that this bill required " nothing more than is enjoined by 
the Constitution, and which contains the bond of union and the 
security of harmony; and in the name of Washington, I would 
invoke all parties to observe, maintain, and defend it." He said it 
was the handiwork of sages and patriots, and resulted from intelli- 
gent concessions, for the benefit of all.^ Many speeches were filled 
with prophecies, more or less openly expressed, of the dissolution 
of the Union, Mr. Soule said the South must fight for its rights, 
since it is the weaker of the two sections.^ It had come down to 
the question, How could the Union be preserved?* Some con- 
cessions must be made. Mr. Badger urged the bill, because it 
"will give assurance, it will satisfy the public mind that the Gov- 
ernment is disposed, is truly anxious, to accomplish the restitu- 
tion of fugitive slaves ; sincerely wnshed and is resolved to do 
right to the uttermost of its power. The proof of this will be 
complete, because we furnish the best means for the recovery of 
the slave himself, and if these fail we can secure prompt and 
adequate indemnity for the loss."^ 

§ 32. Arguments against the bill. — On the Northern side, there 
seems to have been an admission that some bill of the kind was 
necessary for the interests of the Union, The opposition dwelt 
chiefly, therefore, upon the details of the measure. Many con- 
sidered them unjust, as recognizing only one class of rights, those 
of the masters. Mr. Chase, fronl the antislavery wqng, demanded 
that a claim of this kind be put on the same footing as any other 
statutory right. " Claims of right in the services of individuals 

1 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong. 2 Sess., Appendix, 1622. 

2 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong. 1 Sess., 79. 
8 Congressional Globe, 3i Cong, i Sess., 78. 
* Von Hoist, III. 493. 

6 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., Appendix, 1597. 



§32.] Arguments against the Bill. 33 

found under the protection of the laws of a free State must be 
investigated in the same manner as other claims of right. If the 
most ordinary controversy involving a contested claim, of twenty 
dollars must be decided by jury, surely a controversy which in- 
volves the right of a man to his liberty should have a similar trial. 
... It will not do for a man to go into a State where every legal 
presumption is in favor of freedom, and seize a person whom he 
claims as a fugitive slave, and say, 'This man is my slave, and by 
my authority under the Constitution of the United States I carry 
him off, and whoever interferes does so at his peril.' He is asked. 
' Where is your warrant?' and he produces none; ' Where is your 
evidence of claim?' and he offers none. The language of his 
action is, 'My word stands for law.'" 



CHAPTER III. 
PRINCIPAL CASES FROM 1789 TO 1860. 

§ 33. Change in character of cases. 

§ 34. The first case of rescue (1793). 

§ 35. President Washington's demand for a fugitive (1796). 
§ 36. Kidnapping cases. 

§ 37. Jones case (1836). 

§ 38. Solomon Northrup case (about 1830). 

§ 39- Washington case (between 1840 and 1850). 

§ 40. Oberlin case (1841). 
§ 41. Interference and rescues. 

§ 42. Chickasaw rescue (1836). 

§ 43. Philadelphia case (1S38). 

§ 44. Latimer case (1842). 

§ 45. Ottoman case (1846). 
§ 46. Interstate relations. 

§ 47. Boston and Isaac cases (1837, 1839). 

§ 48. Ohio and Kentucky cases (1848). 
§ 49. Prosecutions. 

§ 50. Van Zandt, Pearl, and Walker cases (1840, 1S44). 
§ 51. Unpopularity of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1S50. 
§ 52. Principle of the selection of cases. 

§ 53. Hamlet case (1850). 

§ 54. Sims case (1851) 

§ 55. Burns case (1854). 

§ 56. Garner case (1856). 

§ 57. Shadrach case (1S51). 

§ 58. Jerry McHenry case (1851). 

§ 59. Oberlin- Wellington case (1858). 

§ 60. Christiana case (1851). 

§ 61. Miller case (1851). 

§ 62. John Brown in Kansas (1S58). 

§ 33. Change in character of cases. — The cases of escape which 
occur in the period beginning with the formation of the Constitu- 
tion, and ending with the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law in 
1850, will be found, in comparison with those of colonial times, 
much more frequent, more complex in action, and more varied in 
detail. Instead of many colonies under governments independent 
one of another, there was now one government and one country; 

[3-1] 



§§33-35-] TJie First Case of Rescue. 35 

nevertheless, the extinction of the system of bondage and the rise 
of the antislavery sentiment in the Northern States brought into 
the cases new and difficuh elements. No attempt will be made to 
mention the cases in their chronological order, or to describe them 
all. They will be classified into cases of simple escape, of kid- 
napping, of rescue, and of State interference ; and typical examples 
will be described in each category. 

§ 34. The first case of rescue. — The first attempt to enforce the 
act of 1793, of which any record has been discovered, immediately 
revealed its unfairness, and the indisposition of the North to 
carry it out. 

Mr. Josiah Quincy, then a young lawyer, afterwards known as 
a public man and the President of Harvard College, has left an 
interesting account of his connection with the case. " He states 
that the process was issued by a justice of the peace, that he was 
retained as counsel for the alleged slave, that he prepared his 
brief, and went down loaded with all the necessary authorities. 
He found a great crowd of people assembled ; but while he was 
in the midst of the argument, he heard a noise, and, turning 
around, he saw the constables lying sprawling on the floor, and 
a passage opening through the crowd, through which the fugitive 
was taking his departure without stopping to hear the opinion of 
the court, and that was the last of that case, and that was the last 
of the law of 1793 in Massachusetts."^ 

§ 35. President Washington's demand for a fugitive. — As has been 
noticed in a previous chapter, George Washington's boyhood was 
connected with white slavery. Now, at the zenith of his public life, 
we find one of his chattels the occasion of the first recorded refusal 
on moral grounds to return a slave. In 1796, President VVashing- 

' Mr. Quincy also states, that "about a fortnight elapsed, when I was called upon by 
Rufus Green Amory, a lawyer of eminence at the Boston bar in that day, who showed 
me a letter from a Southern slaveholder, directing him to prosecute Josiah Quincy for 
the penalty under the law of 1793, foi" obstructing the agent of the claimant in obtain- 
ing his slave under the process established by that law. Mr. Amory felt, no less than 
myself, the folly of such a pretence ; and I never heard from him, or from any one, 
anything more upon the subject of prosecution. This fact, and the universal gratifica- 
tion which the fact appeared to give to the public, satisfied my mind, that, unless by 
accident, or stealth, or in some very thin settled part of the country, the law of 1793 
would be forever inoperative, as the event has proved in Massachusetts."— Meeting 
at Faneuil Hall to protest against the Fugitive Slave Law, letter read from Josiah 
Quincy, Boston Atlas, Oct. 15, 1850; Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery, 232; Appen- 
di.x D, No. 12. 



36 Fugitive Slaves : — Cases. [Ch. iii. 

ton wrote to Mr. Whipple, Collector of Portsmouth, N. H., to send 
back to him one of his slaves who had escaped to that place, if it 
could be done without exciting a mob. This letter has been pre- 
served, and the following extract gives us an insight into President 
Washington's opinions upon the rendition of fugitives : — 

" However well disposed I might be to gradual abolition, or 
even to an entire emancipation of that description of people, (if the 
latter was in itself practicable,) at this moment it would neither be 
politic nor just to reward unfaithfulness with a premature prefer- 
ence, and thereby discontent beforehand the minds of all her fellow 
serv'ts, who, by their steady attachment, are far more deserving 
than herself of favor." ^ 

Mr. Whipple answered, that any return would be impossible; 
public sentiment was too strong against it. 

§ 36. Kidnapping cases. — The great number of cases of kidnap- 
ping throughout the period from 1793 to 1850 show what cruel 
and unjust deeds were possible under the existing system, and 
served as nothing else could to rouse people to the defence of 
negroes. Various were the methods by which, in spite of law, 
kidnappers were enabled to secure their prey. Perhaps the most 
common practice, in places where the courts were known to be, 
friendly to slavery, was to arrest a man on some false pretence, 
and then, when he appeared in court without opportunity to se- 
cure papers or witnesses, to claim him as a fugitive slave. Most 
of these cases occurred in communities bordering upon or near 
the Southern States. The risk and trouble of transporting slaves 
across free States were so great, that up to 1850 we seldom hear of 
kidnapping cases, and rarely of the capture of a genuine fugitive 
in the New England States. 

The natural consequence of such acts of outrageous violence 
was to rouse people to the forcible rescue of the captured negroes. 
In the earliest cases, colored people seem to take the leadership ; 
later on, the whites joined, and became most active in the work. 

§ -^^J. Jones case. — The following instance well exemplifies this 
form of oppression. George Jones, a respectable colored man, 
was arrested on Broadway, New York, in 1836, on the pretext that 
he had committed assault and battery. As he knew that no such 
charge could be sustained against him, he at first refused to go 
with his captors ; but finally he yielded, on the assurance of his 

^ Appendix D, No. 13. 



§§35-38-] Kidnapping. 37 

employer that ever3^thing possible should be done for him. He 
was then placed in Bridewell, and his friends were told that when 
they were wanted they " would be sent for " ; but, soon after one 
o'clock that same day, he was taken before the Hon. Richard 
Riker, Recorder of New York, and to the satisfaction of that ma<?is- 
trate was proved to be a slave. Thus, in less than two hours after 
his arrest he was hurried away as the property of the kidnappers: 
their word had been accepted as sufficient evidence, and he had 
not been allowed to secure the presence of a single friendly 
witness.^ 

§ 38. Solomon Northup case. — Sometimes, if they feared to en- 
ter their case in court, slave hunters could find opportunity, by 
watching a negro for a while, to carry out their plans through 
some small deception. One of the most striking of these cases 
is that of Solomon Northup, who has written an account of his 
experiences as freeman and as slave. He was born in 1808 in 
New York State. His father had been made a free man by the 
provisions of his master's will. Thus Solomon was brought up 
under the influences of freedom, and knew little of slavery. After 
his marriage, he lived for some years in Saratoga. Here he earned 
a comfortable livelihood. During the day he worked about the 
hotels, and in the evenings he was often engaged to play the violin 
at parties. One day, two men, apparently managers of a travel- 
ling circus company, met him and offered him good pay if he 
would go with them as a violinist to Washington. He consented. 
Their behavior seemed to him peculiar, but he remained in their 
service, only to find himself one morning in a slave pen in Wash- 
ington. How he got there remained always a mystery, but it is 
evident that he must have been drugged. Resistance was useless. 
He was carried South and sold to Mr. Epps, a hard master, with 
whom he remained for twelve years. 

After he had long given up all hopes of escape, a friend was 
found in a Northern man who was working on the same plantation. 
Mr. Bass consented, though at a great risk to himself, to write 
some letters, telling Solomon's story to his Northern friends. The 
letters reached their destination, and, under the law of 1840 against 
kidnapping, a memorial was prepared to the Governor of New York. 
He became interested, and immediately sent a man South to find 
Northrup. After a long search, the agent was directed to Mr. 

^ Appendix D, No. 19. 



38 Fugitive Slaves: — Cases. [Ch. Hi. 

Epps's plantation. Much to the disappointment of the master, 
who used every means to prevent his return, Solomon was identi- 
fied at last, and went back to New York again a free man. Efforts 
were made to prosecute the kidnappers; but as sufficient evidence 
could not be obtained, no case was made out.^ 

§ 39. "Washington case. — So bold did these stealers of men be- 
come, that they sometimes resorted to simple force, without the 
slightest attempt at concealment. A case of this kind occurred in 
Washington, D. C, between 1840 and 1850. Three or four men 
seized a negro who was employed in a hotel near the Capitol, and 
dragged him away. Mr. Hall, proprietor of the house, after trying 
in vain to prevent tlfe arrest, succeeded at last in compelling them 
to take the man before a magistrate. The justice declined to 
assume jurisdiction in such a ca.se, and before any other protection 
could be provided, the man was hurried by the kidnappers into a 
hack, and taken across the Potomac into bondage.^ 

§40. Oberlin case. — Occasionally the result was less fortunate 
for the captors. In Oberlin, three slave hunters seized by force a 
negro man and his wife, and carried them to an inn for the night. 
In the mean time the people of the town decided that the negroes 
must have a trial. They therefore employed a lawyer, who dis- 
covered that the writ for the capture was illegal, and secured a 
hearing. The captives were placed in jail, but, aided by some 
undivulged agency, they managed to break the grates of their 
prison windows, and escaped to Canada before the day set for 
trial.^ 

§41. Interference and rescues After a kidnapping case had 

occurred in a Northern village or town, measures were frequently 
taken by the indignant citizens to prevent the recurrence of such 
acts. They organized vigilance committees, or the antislavery 
societies took it up as a part of their work. In a free commu- 
nity, public sentiment would not allow negro towns-people to 
stand entirely unprotected. Thus miany of the cases of inter- 
ference and rescue were the result of some organized movements 
on the part of the white people, though occasionally they came 
about through the unpremeditated action of a mob. 

§ 42. Chickasaw rescue. — The first case which has been found 
occurred in 1836. A writ of habeas corpus was served against 

1 Appendi.x D, No. i6. 2 Appendix D, No. 42. 

8 Appendix D, No. 26. 



§§38-44-] Interference and Rescues. 39 

Captain Eldridge of the brig Chickasaw, for holding two colored 
women in his ship with the intention of carrying them South. 
' As both presented free papers at the hearing, the judge ordered 
them discharged ; but the agent of John B. Morris of Baltimore, 
who demanded their return, declared that he would soon have 
sufficient evidence to prove them fugitives. Thereupon the col- 
ored people rushed in, took the women to a carriage, and carried 
them away to safety.^ 

§ 43. Philadelphia and Kennedy cases. — A similar but unsuccess- 
ful attempt was made in Philadelphia in 1838. A slave had been 
delivered to the man claiming to be his master. As the captors 
were about to take him away, a crowd of colored people gathered 
and attempted to rescue him. It was not so simple a matter in 
a large city as in a country town. A body of police soon appeared, 
protected the slaveholders, and finally arrested some of the leaders 
among the free blacks.^ 

A few years later, in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, three negroes were 
arrested and their identity established as the slaves of Messrs. 
Kennedy and Hollingsworth of Maryland. The colored people of 
the neighborhood had caused a writ of habeas corpus to be issued 
and a second hearing was held. Judge Hepburne decided that 
the magistrate first employed had no right to commit the alleged 
fugitives, but he himself remanded them. A riot ensued, and some 
thirty-six persons were tried for participating in it.^ 

§ 44. Latimer case. — In the Latimer case, the first of that series 
of famous fugitive slave trials which took place in Boston, was 
strongly developed the feeling against kidnapping, or in fact 
against the rendition of a slave under any circumstances. 

In 1842, George Latimer was seized in Boston without a warrant, 
at the request of James B. Grey of Norfolk, Virginia. Latimer's 
counsel, Samuel E. Sewall and Amos B. Merrill, sued out a writ of 
habeas corpus, but after argument Chief Justice Shaw denied it. 
Mr. Grey asked for time to procure evidence against Latimer from 
Virginia. The judge ruled that the request should be granted, and 
that Latimer should for the time being be kept in the custody of 
the city jailer, Nathaniel Cooledge. A writ of personal replevin, 
under the act of 1837 securing trial by jury,* was then sworn out, 



i Appendix D, No. 20. 2 Appendix D, No. 22. 

' Appendix D, No. 35. * Seepasi, § 81. 



40 Fugitive Slaves : — Cases. [Ch. ii\. 

but Justice Shaw decided that, according to the decision by the 
Supreme Court in the Prigg case, the law was illegal^ 

The proceedings aroused great indignation throughout the city 
and State. Meetings to devise means of aiding Latimer were held 
in Faneuil Hall and Belknap Street church. Stirring speeches 
were made by Wendell Phillips and others, and resolutions con- 
demning the proceedings of the authorities, and remonstrating 
against the return of Latimer, were adopted. Bands of ruffians 
strove to break up the meetings, and succeeded in greatly disturb- 
ing them. To rouse the people, to give expression to public sen- 
timent, and to spread the news from day to day, Dr. H. I. Bow- 
ditch and Dr. W. F. Channing edited a paper called " The Latimer 
Journal and North Star." This was published for a number of 
week^ by the friends of the fugitive. Petitions were sent to the 
sheriff to remove the jailer, and to the Governor asking the re- 
moval of the sheriff if he did not accede to their demand. There- 
upon Latimer's custodian agreed to give him up for a sufficient 
payment. The sum of four hundred dollars was accordingly 
raised, the proceedings came to an abrupt termination, and 
Latimer was released. 

The excitement produced, however, did not die out immediately, 
and some of the results were far-reaching. So intense was the 
public excitement, that, soon after, a petition was prepared and 
sent to Congress, asking an amendment to the Constitution. This 
was signed by fifty thousand people in Massachusetts, and pre- 
sented in the House by Mr. Adams. Another, signed by sixty-five 
thousand people, was sent to the legislature. The effect was the 
act of 1843, forbidding all officers to aid in the recapture of a 
fugitive slave, or to permit the use of State jails for their imprison- 
ment. The petition to Congress was not received. A resolution 
from the Latimer committee, which proposed an amendment to 
the Constitution so as to base representation on " free persons," 
brought about much discussion, and was not received in the House. 
In the Senate it excited even more violent opposition, and the 
resolutions were laid on the table and not printed.^ 

§ 45. Ottoman case. — Similar indignation was felt in Boston over 
the case of Captain Hannum of the brig Ottoman. He had found 
a runaway concealed on board, but had set sail to return, evidently 
with the intention of taking the man back into captivity. A 

1 Ante, § 25. 2 Appendix D, No. 28; sze post, §81. 



§§44-48] Interstate Relations. 41 

steamer was sent out to rescue the slave, but the Ottoman man- 
aged to elude it, and the man was lost. At a meeting held Sep- 
tember 24, 1846, a committee was appointed for the purpose of 
preventing similar outrages.^ 

§ 46. Interstate relations.— The spirit of opposition to the execu- 
tion of the Fugitive Slave Law made itself feU, not only in popular 
demonstrations and in legislation, but in interstate relations. We 
have already noticed the Prigg case,^ and its effect in relieving the 
States from any responsibility in the enforcement of the law. 
Other States took advantage of this decision, and of the general 
principle of international law, that one nation or state is not bound 
to enforce the municipal law of another. 

§ 47. Boston and Isaac cases (1837-1839). — In 1837 a runaway 
was found on the ship Boston, then on her homeward voyage from 
Georgia to Maine. After landing, the slave succeeded in getting 
to Canada. The Governor of Georgia charged the captain with 
slave-stealing, and demanded his return as a fugitive from justice. 
The Governor of Maine would not comply with the request, be- 
cause, as he said, the laws of that State recognized slaves not as 
property, but as persons. The indignant legislature of Georgia 
adopted resolutions calling upon Congress so to amend the laws 
that the Governor of Maine should be compelled to give up slave 
stealers as fugitives from justice. Resolutions were presented in 
the United States Senate, but no action was taken.^ 

The refusal to use State machinery against fugitives extended 
to the process of extradition against persons connected with the 
rescue of slaves. Thus in the Isaac case, in 1839, Virginia asked 
New York for the arrest of three colored men who were accused 
of abetting a slave's escape. The Governor of New York returned 
answer, that no State could demand the surrender of a fugitive 
from justice for an act which was made criminal only by its own 
legislation.* 

§48. Ohio and Kentucky case. — Kentucky, in 1848, demanded^ 
from the Governor of Ohio the extradition of fifteen persons on' 
the charge of aiding the escape of a fugitive. Governor Bell 
refused, on the ground that Ohio laws did not recognize property 
in man.^ 

1 Appendix D, No. 34. * Ante, § 25. 

3 Appendix D, No. 21. • * Appendix D, No. 24. 

6 Appendix D, No. 37. 



42 Fugitive Slaves: — Cases. [Ch. iii. 

§ 49. Prosecutions. — The effects of the aid and protection thus 
given fugitives by Northern people or governments awakened 
among the slaveholders a feeling of wrong and indignation. The 
Fugitive Slave Law was clear, and they determined to carry it out 
to the letter. They began, therefore, energetically to prosecute 
people for aiding and harboring escaping slaves. The case just 
mentioned shows how difficult it was to secure prosecutions be- 
yond the State boundaries. When the offence occurred within the 
bounds of a slave State, the judgments were most severe, and the 
heaviest possible fines and longest terms of imprisonment were 
inflicted for simple acts of charity. 

§ 50. Van Zandt, Pearl, and Walker cases. — Mr. Van Zandt, re- 
turning into the country from Cincinnati one day in 1840, took 
nine fugitive slaves from Kentucky into his farm wagon. He was 
stopped by three persons, and all but two of the slaves were recap- 
tured. Mr. Van Zandt was arrested, taken into court, and fined 
twelve thousand dollars, which exhausted his entire property.^ 

A still more severe penalty was that imposed upon Captain 
Drayton, of the schooner Pearl, in 1848. He took on board sev- 
enty-five fugitive slaves, and sailed up the Potomac. An armed 
steamer, sent in pursuit, overtook them and brought them back. 
Captain Drayton and another officer of the schooner were placed 
in prison, where they remained for twenty years, and at last were 
relieved only through the efforts of Charles Sumner.^ 

Another instance of the same sort is the case of Mr. Jonathan 

Walker, in 1S44. With seven fugitives he embarked from Pensa- 

cola in an open boat for the Bahama Islands, but he received a 

sun-stroke and was obliged to leave the m.anagement of the craft in 

the hands of the negroes. On account of the accident, they were 

overtaken by two sloops, and both fugitives and their protector 

captured. Mr. Walker was twice tried, imprisoned, sentenced to 

stand in the pillory, and branded on the hand with the letters S. S., 

slave stealer.^ The crime and the punishment have alike been 

glorified in W' hittier's verses : — 

"Then lift that manly right hand, bold ploughman of the wave ! 
Its branded hand shall prophesy ' Salvation to the Slave!' 
Hold up its fire-wrought language that whoso reads may feel 
His heart swell strong within him, his sinews change to steel."* 

1 Appendix D, No. 25. 2 Appendix D, No. 40. 

8 Appendix D, No. 31. 

* Liberator, Aug. 15, 1845, "The Branded Hand." 



§§ 49-53-] Prosecutions, Act of 1850. 43 

§51. Unpopularity of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. — The passage 
of the new law probably increased the number of antislavery 
people more than anything else which had occurred during the 
whole agitation. Many of those formerly indifferent were roused to 
active opposition by a sense of the injustice of the Fugitive Slave 
Act as they saw it executed in Boston and elsewhere. Hence, 
in the cases of the period from 1850 to the outbreak of the Civil 
War, we shall find a new element. The antislavery party, grown 
strong, resisted the regulations, and instead of the unquestioned 
return of a fugitive, as in colonial times, or of prosecutions 
carried on under the simple conditions of the act of 1793, the 
struggle became long and complex. In fact during this time 
hardly an important case can be cited in which there was not 
some opposition to the natural course of the law. These exasper- 
ating effects were not at first apparent to the South, since before 
the famous rescues began several cases of rendition showed the 
power of the Executive. As the escapes grew more and more 
frequent yearly, increasing all the time in boldness, the slave- 
holders put forth greater efforts to punish the offenders, and 
prosecutions were numerous. But the " new law had no moral 
foundation," and against such an act public sentiment must sooner 
or later revolt, no matter how severe may be its provisions.^ As 
Mr. James Freeman Clarke has said, " It was impossible to con- 
vince the people that it was right to send back to slavery men 
who were so desirous of freedom as to run such risks. All edu- 
cation from boyhood up to manhood had taught us to believe that 
it was the duty of all men to struggle for freedom." ^ 

§ 52. Principle of the selection of cases. — The large number of 
cases occurring between 1850 and i860 renders it impossible to 
present a detailed account of them all in a brief monograph. The 
selection, therefore, includes only such as are typical of the various 
phases of the agitation. 

§ 53. Hamlet case (1850). — The first recorded action under the 
provisions of the law of 1850 took place on the 26th of Septem- 
ber of that year, just eight days after the passage of the act. 
James Hamlet, a free negro, who with his family had been living 
for several years in New York, was on that day arrested by a dep- 
uty United States Marshal as the fugitive slave of Mary Brown 
of Baltimore. After a hasty examination by Commissioner Gardi- 

^ Von Hoist, IV. 10, II. 2 j_ Y. Clarke, Antislavery Days, 92. 



44 Fugitive Slaves : — Casrs. [Ch. iii. 

ner, he was surrendered in accordance with tlie new law. These 
proceedings were not sufficientfy well known at the time to excite 
a mob, but when discovered they roused so strong a feeling that 
the money necessary, to redeem Hamlet was almost immediately 
raised, and on the 5th of October he was brought back from 
slavery.^ 

§ 54. Sims case (1851). — Another instance in Boston, often men- 
tioned as the first under the law of 1850, but really six months later 
than the Hamlet case, is that of Thomas M. Sims. A common 
method of seizure was followed. Marshal Tukey arrested Sims on 
a false charge of theft. Mr. Potter of Virginia then claimed him 
as his slave. Court Square was filled with people. The Marshal 
feared a popular outbreak while the matter was pending, and, to 
the indignation of the city, caused the court-house in which Sims 
was confined to be surrounded with chains. As these were but 
four feet from the ground, the judges as they went in and out from 
the sessions were forced, morning and night, to bow beneath them. 
The building was also strongly guarded by a company of armed 
men, ever afterward known as the " Sims Brigade.'' Robert Ran- 
toul, Jr. and Samuel E. Sewall conducted Sims's case, Commis- 
sioner Curtis overruled the constitutional objections to the Fugitive 
Slave Law, and to the judicial functions of the Commissioners of 
the United States courts. Then, despite all efforts of the anti- 
slavery people in his behalf, the certificate which sent Sims back to 
Virginia was made out and signed by Commissioner Curtis.^ The 
Liberator says of the popular sentiment: "One feeling was visi- 
ble on almost every countenance, commiseration, humiliation, — 
commiseration for the victim, humiHation at the degradation of 
Massachusetts. No man talked, no man thought, of violence. 
Why? Because it is acquiesced in? No! no! Because it is 
approved? A thousand times, no! but because government is 
pleased to enforce the law, and resistance is hopeless." ^ Sims 
was taken from his cell in the early morning, observed only by 
a few faithful vigilants, and, amid platoons of armed men, con- 
ducted to the United States ship Acorn, which was detailed to 
carry him back to the South.* 

The indignation of the antislavery people remained to be ex- 
pressed, and a mass meeting was held on the Common and in 

1 Api)endix D, No. 43. ^ Appendix D, No. 48. 

8 Liberator, April 17, 1851. * Daily Morning Chronicle, April 26, 1851. 



§§53-SS-] Sims and Bairns. 45 

Tremont Temple. Wendell Phillips and Theodore Parker ad- 
dressed the assemblage, and Phillips noticed the fact that hostile 
troops had not been seen in the streets of Boston since the red- 
coats marched up from Long Wharf.^ 

§ 55. Burns case (1854). — The rendition of Anthony Burns in 
1854 was the last great fugitive slave case which occurred in 
Boston. Burns was the property of Charles F. Suttle of Virginia. 
He escaped in 1854, and came to Boston. One of the first things 
he did was to write a letter to his brother, still a slave in the 
South. Unfortunately, though this was mailed in Canada, by some 
oversight it was dated in Boston. Since a letter to a slave was 
always opened by the master, Burns's hiding place was discov- 
ered.2 ^e was arrested upon the usual charge of theft. Then, 
upon a warrant issued by Judge Loring, he was claimed as a 
fugitive slave by Suttle, 

When the knowledge of the arrest began to circulate, the most 
intense excitement prevailed. Handbills asking all antislavery 
people to go to Boston were sent throughout the country. Public 
meetings held in Faneuil and Meionaon Halls were crowded with 
representatives from all the towns about.-"^ One of the people who 
took part in the attempted rescue which followed one of these 
meetings thus describes it: — 

" On the evening of the 26th of May, we went down to Fan- 
euil Hall to hear Wendell Phillips. He counselled waiting until 
morning before any attempt to rescue Burns should be made, 
but the excited audience silenced him with shouts of ' No, no ! 
to-night ! to-night ! ' 

" Mr. Phillips saw that it was useless to try to go on, so he sat 
down and Mr. Theodore Parker began speaking. At first he ad- 
vocated the same plan, but at last, as he found the crowd growing 
more and more eager and uproarious, he said, * Well, if you will, 
let us go ! ' and led the way out of the hall. The people followed, 
and my friend and I were among the first to reach the court- 
house. There we found prepared for us long beams and boxes 
of axes. Five or six men seized one of these beams, and before 
its pressure the large door of the court-house crushed like glass. 
Mr. Higginson first stepped in, but just then a pistol shot was 
heard, and the mob fell back. Mr. Higginson looked around, 

1 Liberator, April 17. 1851. 2 Appendix D, No. 57. 

8 Boston Journal, May 29, 1854. 



46 Ftigitive Slaves : — Cases. [Ch. iii. 

and entreated them not to desert him, but the favorable moment 
v\-as gone. The people should have lost no time in filling the 
house, for the marines had been ordered from the Navy Yafd, 
and when they appeared nothing further could be done." ^ In 
this riot James Batchelder, one of the Marshal's guards, was 
killed. 

At the trial, though Burns was ably defended by Mr. R. H. 
Dana and others, it was of no avail. His identity was unfortu- 
nately established from the first. He had recognized and ad- 
dressed his master, and also a Mr. Brant, who had once hired him. 
The order for his rendition was therefore at once given.^ 

Guarded by a large military force he was conducted through 
the streets, filled with an indignant multitude, to the United States 
cutter Morris, which had been ordered by the President to take 
him back.^ Many buildings on the route were hung with black, 
and so great was the popular excitement, that Rev. J. F. Clarke, an 
eyewitness of the affair, has said : " It was evident that a very 
trifling incident might have brought on a collision, and flooded 
the streets with blood." 

The difficulty of enforcing the act was shown in the precaution- 
ary measures immediately adopted by the government. The city 
police, the militia, the marines, and some regular troops, were 
ordered out to the task of guarding one poor fugitive. It cost 
the country one hundred thousand dollars to send this single 
slave back to his master.* 

Not long after Burns's return, a sum of money, to which Charles 
Devens, United States Marshal at his trial, contributed largely, 
was raised in Boston and the vicinity for his purchase ; but it was 
found impossible to eff"ect it.° 

Mr. Higginson, Wendell Phillips, and Theodore Parker, with 
others, were indicted for riot, but the indictment was quashed by 
Judge Curtis on technical grounds, and they were discharged.^ 

§ 56. Garner case (1856). — Of all the cases of rendition, the sad- 
dest, and next to the Burns case probably the best known at the 

1 Personal statement of Mr. El bridge Sprague, made to the writer. Col. T. W. 
Higginson suggests a few minor corrections in Mr. Sprague's narrative. The first 
person to step in was an unknown negro : the beam used was found in Court Square ; 
none were prepared beforehand; there was but one box of axes. 

- IJoston Daily Advertiser, 1S54, Worcester Spy, May 31, 1S54, Argument of Mr. 
R. II. Dana. 

3 Liberator, Aug. 22, 1S54. * Von Hoist, V. 64. 

s Appendi.\ D, No. 57. ^ Commonwealth, June 26, 1S54. 



§§55-57-1 Garner and Shadrach. 47 

time, was that of Margaret Garner. In accounts of the Under- 
ground Raih'oad we are told that winter was the favorite season 
for flight in the section of the country south of the Ohio, since ice 
then covered the river, and the difficuky of crossing by boat did 
not arise. It was at this season that Simeon Garner, his son Rob- 
ert, and their famihes, fled from Kentucky and crossed the frozen 
stream to the house of a colored man in Cincinnati. They were 
soon traced thither, and after a desperate hand to hand struggle 
the house was entered. There the pursuers found that Mar- 
garet Garner, preferring for her children death to slavery, had 
striven to take their lives, and one lay dead. The case was im- 
mediately brought into court, where, despite the efforts made to 
save them, rendition was decided upon. On the way back, Mar- 
garet, in despair, attempted to drown herself and her child in the 
river; but even the deliverance of death was denied her, for she 
was recovered and sold, to be carried yet farther south. -^ 

§ 57. Shadrach case (1851). — In the three typical cases just de- 
scribed, neither the law's delay, violent interference, nor the des- 
peration of the slave, availed to prevent the return of the fugitive 
to the oppressor. Let us turn from this group, and take up those 
more important cases wherein the law was not allowed to complete 
its course, but rescues were accomplished, either by free negroes 
or antislavery people. First in time and importance comes the 
case of Shadrach, which occurred in Boston in February, 185 1. 

In May, 1850, a slave named Frederic Wilkins had run away 
from Virginia and come to Boston, where he found employment as 
a waiter in the Cornhill Coffee House under the alias of Shadrach. 
He had been there not quite a year, however, when John De Bere, 
his master in Norfolk, sent some one in pursuit of him. A war- 
rant was served and he was arrested while at work. United States 
Commissioner Riley then took him to the court-house, where 
Mr. List, a young lawyer of antislavery sympathies, offered his 
aid as counsel, and Messrs. Charles G. Davis, Samuel E. Sewall, 
and Ellis Gray Loring also came to his assistance. Mr. List ob- 
tained some delay in the proceedings; but since, by the act of 
1843,^ the use of State jails had been denied for fugitives, the offi- 
cers were obliged to keep the prisoner in the court-room until an- 
other place of confinement could be found. By this time a large 
number of people had gathered about the building, and were trying 

1 Appendix D, No. 58. 2 See/cj/, § 81. 



48 Fugitive Slaves : — Cases. [Ch. iii. 

to force an entrance. For a long time they were unable to enter, 
but at last opportunity was given as Mr. Davis opened the door to 
leave the court-room. In spite of all efforts on the part of the 
officers to close the door, a body of colored people under the lead 
of Lewis Hayden rushed in and seized the prisoner. They carried 
him triumphantly out of the court-room on their shoulders, and 
soon saw him safely started for Canada. Mr. Davis and others 
were prosecuted for aiding in the rescue, but nothing was proved 
against them. Intense excitement prevailed in the city, and finally 
throughout the country, since Congress took up this infringement 
of the law.-^ 

Mr. Clay, February 17, 185 1, introduced a resolution which 
requested the President to send to Congress " any information he 
may possess in regard to the alleged recent case of a forcible 
resistance to the execution of the laws of the United States in the 
city of Boston," and communicate to Congress " what means he 
has adopted to meet the occurrence," and "whether, in his opinion, 
any additional legislation is necessary to meet the exigencies of 
the case." 2 President Pierce then issued a proclamation announ- 
cing the facts to the country, and calling on all people to assist in 
quelling this and other disturbances. The Senate's request was 
also answered in an Executive message to Congress, which an- 
nounced to them that the President would use all his constitutional 
powers to insure the execution of the laws. Such unusual national 
interference gave the case wide celebrity, and, as Von Hoist says, 
" The pretensions and assumptions of the South were encouraged 
in a very unwise way, by the fact that, by such a manner of 
treating the matter, people seemed to recognize that it was en- 
titled to hold the whole North responsible for every violation of 
the compromise, which could properly be laid at the door of only 
a few individuals. The proclamation and the message placed 
the compromise in a far more glaring light than the liberation of 
Shadrach." ^ 

§ 58. Jerry McHenry rescue (1851). — Later, a case occurred at 
Syracuse, New York, which was a significant illustration of the 
successful action of a vigilance committee. Jerry McHenry, a 
respectable colored man who had lived for several years in that 

i Appendix D, No. 47. 

2 31 Cong. 2 Ses.s., Senate Journal, 1S7 ; Congressional Globe, 580. 

8 Von Hoist, III. 25. 



§§ 57-59-] Rescues. 49 

city, was arrested in October, 1851, as a fugitive slave. At the 
examination, which took place at two o'clock in the afternoon, he 
found opportunity to break away from the officers and escape 
through the crowd, which opened to allow him to pass. He was, 
however, immediately pursued and recaptured. It so happened 
that an Agricultural Fair and a convention of the Liberty Party 
were going on at that time in Syracuse, and the city was unusually 
full of people. When the alarm bell gave notice to the vigilance 
committee that a negro had been seized, Mr. Gerrit Smith, who 
was attending the meetings, and Rev. Samuel J. May, with others, 
hastened to the scene. The Commissioner, after the capture, had 
again taken up the trial, but such a disturbance was made by the 
crowd which gathered outside that he was forced to adjourn. 
Meanwhile, Mr. Smith with the committee had planned a rescue, 
and at about half-past eight fully two thousand people had assem- 
bled, and an assault was begun upon the court-house. They broke 
doors and windows, overpowered the officers, and at last bore 
Jerry away in triumph. 

He remained in the home of a friend until he could be sent to 
Canada. Prosecutions were immediately instituted, and eighteen 
persons indicted for taking part in the rescue, but nothing came 
of the case. On the other side, Henry W. Allen, Marshal in the 
case, was tried for kidnapping. The judge declared the Fugi- 
tive Slave Act unconstitutional, but a verdict of not guilty was 
rendered.^ 

§ 59. Oberlin-Wellington rescue (1858). — Sometimes, however, 
general sentiment was so strong that the rescue became, not an 
action instigated and carried through by three or four deter- 
mined men, but the indignant uprising of a whole town. Such 
was the Oberlin-Wellington case, celebrated for the great number 
of prosecutions and the high character of those engaged in it. 
Two kidnappers from Kentucky induced an Oberlin boy, by a 
bribe of twenty dollars, to entice away a negro named John Rice 
on pretence of giving him work. Having taken him to a lonely 
spot, he was seized and carried about eight miles across country 
to Wellington, there to await the south bound train. 

On the way the party was overtaken by an Oberlin College 
student, who at once gave the alarm. A crowd gathered and 
followed the kidnappers to the railway station. There, by placing 

^ Appendix D, No. 51. 
4 



50 



Fugitive Slaves : — Cases. [Ch. iii. 



a ladder upon the balcony they succeeded in rescuing John from 
the upper story of the house in which he was confined. For this 
violation of the law thirty-seven citizens of Oberlin and Wellington 
were indicted. This produced the greatest excitement all over the^ 
country, and the case grew more and more complicated, until the 
proceedings had lasted several months. Public meetings to ex- 
press sympathy with the prosecuted were held in many places. 
Some of them were imprisoned to await the trial, but no severe 
sentences were imposed.^ 

§ 60. Christiana case (1851). — Occasionally the rescue of fugi- 
tives was not accomplished by a sudden unorganized movement, 
but by a deliberate armed defence on the part of the slaves and 
their friends. In the Christiana case the afifair was marked by 
violence and bloodshed, while the fact that the Quakers Castner 
Hanway and Elijah Lewis were afterward prosecuted made it no- 
torious ; and the further fact that the charge was not, as usual, that 
of aiding a fugitive, but of treason, gave it still greater interest. 

In and about Christiana, Pennsylvania, there were many ne- 
groes who had formerly been slaves, descriptions of whom were 
frequently furnished to kidnappers by a band of men known 
throughout the country as the " Gap Gang." A league for mutual 
protection had therefore been formed by the colored people, and 
prominent among them for intelligence and boldness was William 
Parker. Soon after the passage of the law of 1850, Edward Gor- 
such and a party came from Maryland to Christiana for a fugitive 
slave. With United States officers from Philadelphia they went 
immediately to the house of William Parker, where the man they 
were seeking was sheltered. When their demand was refused, they 
fired two shots at the house. This roused the people, and a riot 
ensued in which the fugitive escaped. Mr. Gorsuch was killed, 
his son desperately wounded, and the rest put to flight. Castner 
Hanway at the beginning of the struggle was notified of the kid- 
nappers' presence, and, though feeble in health, hastened to the 
scene. When ordered by Marshal Kline to aid him in accord- 
ance with the law, he refused ; yet, far from leading in the aft'air, 
he tried in every way to prevent bloodshed and bring about 
peace. 

After it was over, Parker, with two other colored men, knowing 
that arrest must follow, secreted themselves under piles of shav- 
1 Appendi.x D, No. 62. 



§§59-62.] Castner Hanway. John Brown. $1 

ings in an old carpenter's shop. At night they sent four wagons 
in different directions as decoys for the detectives, and were 
carried safely away by a fifth. Many negroes hid that night in 
the corn shocks, and under the floors of houses, until escape 
could be made in safety.^ 

Castner Hanway was arrested, and arraigned before the United 
States court on the charge of treason; but no proof of a con- 
spiracy to make a general and public resistance to the law could 
be found, and he was acquitted. Afterward it was desired to try 
Hanway and Lewis for "riot and murder," but the grand jury 
ignored the bill, and all prisoners were released. With th'ese 
prosecutions the end of the affair was apparently reached, though 
perhaps its influence may be traced in a succeeding case. 

§ 6i. Miller case (l85i). — A noted kidnapper from Maryland, 
in 185 I, seized a free negro girl living at the house of Mr. Miller, 
in Nottingham, Pennsylvania, and took her to Baltimore. Mr. 
Miller followed them, and succeeded in getting her freed. He 
then started back, but never reached home. Search was made, 
and his body found upon the way. It was thought that the 
murder was committed in revenge for the part he had taken in 
the Christiana riot.''^ 

§ 62. John Brown in Kansas (1858). — It was during this period 
also that John Brown was endeavoring to put into execution his 
famous plan for freeing the slaves. This is interesting, not only as 
typical of organized efforts to free the slaves on the plantations, but 
also because of its connection with other phases of the slavery ques- 
tion, into which we shall not attempt to enter here. His idea was 
first to gather as large a force as possible, then, when his men were 
properly drilled, to run off the slaves in large numbers ; to retain 
the brave and strong in the mountains, and to send the weak and 
timid to the North by the " Underground Railroad." ^ 

In December, 1858, Brown divided his forces into two divisions, 
and went into Missouri. Here he succeeded in freeing eleven 
slaves, and, though pursued by a far superior number of Missou- 
rians, took them safely into Kansas. The affair, by its boldness, 
created great excitement throughout the South. The Governor 
of Missouri offered three thousand dollars reward, and the Presi- 

. 1 Appendix D, No. 49. ^ Appendix D, No. 50. 

3 Sanborn, Life and Letters of John Brown, 420 ; DougLass, Life and Times of John 
Brown, 279, 282. 



52 Fugitive Slaves: — Cases. [Ch. iii. 

dent of the United States two hundred and fifty dollars, for 
Brown's capture; within a very short time he had succeeded in 
conveying himself and his eleven fugitives safely into Canada, and 
the horses which he had appropriated from the slaveholders in 
order to carry his proteges out of Kansas were afterward publicly 
sold by him in Ohio.^ 

^ Von Hoist, John Brown, 104. 



CHAPTER IV. 

FUGITIVES AND THEIR FRIENDS. 

§63. Methods of escape. 

§ 64. Reasons for escape. 

§ 65. Conditions of slave life. 

§ 66. Escapes to the woods. 

§ 67. Escapes to the North. 

§ 68. Use of protection papers. 

§ 69. Fugitives disguised as whites : Craft case. 
§ 70. Underground Railroad. 

§71. Rise and growth of the system. 

§ 72. Methods pursued. 

§ 73. Colored agents of the Underground Railroad. 

§ 74. Prosecutions of agents. 

§ 75. Formal organization. 

§ 76. General effect of escapes. 

§ 63. Methods of escape. — The great increase in the number of 
fuo-itives after 1850 was in part due to the uneasiness felt by 
Northern people under a law which made them co-workers with 
the South in a system of slave hunting, and in part to the greater 
ease of communication now afforded between the two sections. 
The knowledge that there was in the North a body of " aboli- 
tionists " eager to aid them from bondage to freedom was also 
spreading more widely each day among the slaves. 

Public interest in the subject was more and more aroused, not 
only by the cases of cruelty and injustice which were forcibly 
broun-ht to the attention of Northern communities, but also by 
the romantic and thrilling episodes of the escapes. To under- 
stand the attitude of the North toward fugitives, it is necessary to 
examine some of the different methods used by the fugitives in their 
flio-ht. Perhaps a better point of view than that of the outside 
observer will be gained by placing ourselves in the position of the 
slave, and examining his motives for flight, the difficulties which 
he encountered at home, the manner in which he overcame them, 
and, finally, the various paths of escape then open to him, and the 
agencies which befriended him and forwarded him on his way. 

[53] 



54 Fugitive Slaves: — Methods. [Ch. iv. 

§ 64. Reasons for escape. — First, why did the slave seek to 
escape? However unhke the attending circumstances, we find 
upon investigation that the negro's desire to run away may be 
traced to one of but three or four m.otives. Among the more 
intelhgent slaves, who could comprehend the nature and injustice 
of their position, it often rose solely from the upspringing in their 
hearts of that love of freedom natural to all men. It is probable 
that in the greater number of cases this was the motive at the root 
of the matter. A fugitive, on being questioned at an Underground 
Railroad station as to his reasons for escape, replied that he had 
had a kind master, plenty to eat and to wear, but that notwith- 
standing this for many years he had been dissatisfied. He was 
thirsting for freedom. ^ Another said that his owner had always 
been considerate, and even indulgent to him. He left for no 
other reason than simply to gain his liberty.^ 

A second reason, and that which perhaps most frequently led 
them to take the decisive step in this often long premeditated act, 
was the cruel treatment received from their masters. An owner 
upon one of the Southern plantations said his slaves usually ran 
away after they had been whipped, or something had occurred 
to make them angry .^ 

A third and very effective cause was the fear of being sold 
South, where slave life, spent in toil under the merciless masters 
of the rice swamps and cotton fields, was seen on its darkest side. 
Such was the horror with which the slave regarded this change, 
that the threat of it was constantly used by owners as one of the 
surest means of reducing their rebellious slaves to submission. In 
the Virginia Slave Mother's Farewell to her Daughters who have 
been sold into Southern bondage, Whittier has well expressed 
their feelings.* 

1 Still, Underground Railroad, 410. 2 ibid., 444. 

3 F. L. Olmsted, Journey in the Back Country, 49. 

* " Gone, gone, — sold and gone 

To the rice swamp dank and lone, — 
Where the slave-whip ceaseless swings, 
Where the noisome insect stings, 
Where the fever demon strews 
Poison with the falling dews, 
Where the sickly sunbeams glare 
Through the hot and misty air, — 

Gone, gone, — sold and gone 

To the rice swamp dank and lone 



§§64-65] Reasons for Escape. 55 

Many cases of this kind came to light through the examinations at 
the Underground Railroad stations. Three brothers once learned 
that the next day they were to be sent South with a slave trader then 
in the vicinity. Filled with terror at the prospect, they preferred 
the danger of death in the swamps to the certainty of life in the 
unknown country. That night they made their escape, but it was 
only after weeks of wandering in swamps and morasses that they 
reached a haven. ^ 

So long as a black family remained together upon one planta- 
tion, their love for one another operated as the strongest bond to 
prevent their departure ; but when, as constantly happened, the 
sale and separation of the members scattered families far and wide, 
with no hope of reunion, the firmest and often the sole tie which 
bound them to the South was broken. There was no longer any- 
thing to hold them back.^ 

§ 65. Conditions of slave life. — These are some of the motives 
which led the slave to plan an escape. It will now be well to 
glance at those surrounding conditions, incident to the time and 
country, which made successful flight particularly difficult. First, 
the slave was a negro ; and in the South, where the presumption 
\Vas that every black man must be a slave, the color of his skin 
gave not only a means of tracing him, but also made him liable at 
any moment to questioning and arrest. 

In both city and country patrols were appointed, whose duty 
it was to keep strict watch over the negroes ; and any slave found 
away from his plantation, unless in livery or provided with a pass, 

From Virginia's hills and waters, — 
Woe is me, my stolen daughters ! 

"There no mother's eye is near them, 
There no mother's ear can hear them ; 
Never, when the torturing lash 
Seams their back with many.a^gash, 
Shall a mother's kindness bless them, 
Or a mother's arms caress them. . . . 

" Oh, when weary, sad, and slow 
From the fields at night they go, 
Faint with toil, and racked with pain, 
To their cheerless homes again, — 
There no brother's voice shall greet them 
There no father's welcome meet them." 

1 Still, Underground Railroad, 443. 2 Ibid., 448. 



56 Fugitive Slaves : — Methods. [Ch. iv. 

could be whipped and sent back to his master.^ It was also law- 
ful for any white man to seize and carry a stray slave to the nearest 
jail.2 The next morning, if not claimed, he was advertised in a 
manner of which the following is an example : — 

"Was taken up and committed to the jail of Halifax Co., on the 26th 
day of May, a dark colored boy who says his name is Jordan Artis ; said 
boy says he was born free, and bound out to Mr. Beale, near Murfreesboro, 
Hartford Co., N. C, and is now twenty-one years of age. Owner is re- 
quested to come forward, prove property, pay charges, and take said boy 
away within time prescribed by law, otherwise he will be dealt with as the 

law directs. 

" O. P. Shell, Jailer. 

"Halifax Co., N. C, June 8, 1855."^ 

If not claimed within one year, such a prisoner could be sold 
by the jailer. Thus Olmsted remarks that " the security of the 
whites is not so much dependent upon patrols, as on the con- 
stant, habitual, and instinctive surveillance and authority of all 
white people over the blacks."* 

§ 66. Escapes to the woods. — If an opportunity for escape should 
present itself, the first question for the slave was, " In what direc- 
tion shall I turn?" Many slaves knew nothing of the Northern 
people, or had heard of Canada only as a cold, barren, uninviting 
country, where the negro must perish. To those who had neither 
the courage nor the knowledge requisite for a long journey, the 
woods and swamps near by offered the only refuge. There they 
built cabins, or lived in caves, and got food by hunting and fish- 
ing, and by raids upon the neighboring plantations. 

In one of the papers of the day an underground den is noticed, 
the opening of which, though in sight of two or three houses, and 
near roads and fields, where passing was constant, had been so 
concealed by a pile of straw, that for many months it had remained 
unnoticed. When discovered, on opening a trap-door, steps were 
seen leading down into a room about six feet square, comfortably 
ceiled with boards, and containing a fire-place. The den was well 
stocked with food by the occupants, who had been missing about 
a year.^ 

1 Williams, History of the Negro Race in America, 293. 

2 Still, Underground Railroad, 27. 

3 F. L. Olmsted, The Cotton Kingdom, 157. 

* F. L. Olmsted, Journey in the Back Countr3% 444. 

5 W. I. Bowditch, Slavery and the Constitution ; Macon (Ga.) Telegram, Nov. 27, 
18^8. 



§§65-67-] Escapes to the North. 57 

In most cases slaves were not so bold, and preferred conceal- 
ment on an uninhabited island, or a bit of land surrounded by 
morasses. We often find advertisements of the time, mentioning 
such places as the probable refuge of runaways. The Savannah 
Georgian of 1839 offers a reward for two men who have been out 
for eighteen months, and are supposed to be encamped in a swamp 
near Pine Grove Plantation. 

In the Great Dismal Swamp, which extends from near Norfolk, 
Virginia, into North Carolina, a large colony of these fugitive ne- 
groes was established, and so long was the custom continued that 
children were born, grew up, and lived their whole lives in its dark 
recesses. Besides their hunting and fishing, they sometimes ob- 
tained food and money, in return for work, from the poor whites 
and the negroes who had homes on the borders of the swamp. It 
was this practice of remaining out near home which, under easy 
masters, brought about the habitual runaways, — men who were 
constantly escaping, and after a little time returning, often of tlieir 
own accord.! One of his masters said of William Browne, afterward 
a well known speaker upon slavery, that he hesitated some time 
before he invested seven hundred dollars in William, for he was 
"a noted runaway." 2 Again, in a Southern paper advertising a 
sale of slaves, one description is thus given : " Number 47, Daniel, 
a runaway, but has not run away during the last two years, aged 
28 years." ^ 

§ 67. Escapes to the North. — Of those who, with heroic hearts 
and firm courage, determined to reach even Canada, many had 
seldom left the plantation on which they were born, and were so 
completely ignorant of geography and relative distances, that the 
best and quickest way northward could seldom be chosen. They 
knew nothing of the facilities for communication possessed by 
their masters through newspapers and telegraph, and would often 
fancy themselves safe when they had travelled but a short distance 
from home. In reality, the white people about were often fully 
informed against them, and arrests were almost sure to follow.'^ 
The journeys of the fugitives were necessarily long, since un- 

1 Ball, Mammoth Pictorial Tour of United States, 54 ; F. L. Olmsted, Journey 
in the Back Country, 155. 

^ W. I. Bowditch, Slavery and the Constitution; Macon (Ga.) Telegram, Nov. 27, 

1S38. 

'^ Liberator, April 12, 1839. 

* Wm. Parker, Freedman's Story, in Atlantic Monthly, February and March, 
1866 ; Letter from Gerrit Smith, in Liberator, Dec. 28, 1838. 



^8 Fugitive Slaves: — Methods. [Ch. iv. 

frequented ways were generally chosen, and but part of the day 
could be used. There is a record of a man who had " taken a 
whole year in coming from Alabama to Cincinnati. He had trav- 
elled only in the night, hiding in the woods during the day. He 
had nothing to eat but what he could get from the fields, some- 
times finding a chicken, green corn, or perhaps a small pig." ^ 

Although the methods "pursued were innumerable, and varied 
from those of the man whose only guide was the north star, to 
those of the party aided onward by the most elaborate arrange- 
ments of the Underground Railroad, the fugitive was obliged to 
follow one of two great routes, by water or by land. From the 
earliest times the ship had been a favorite refuge. Once on board 
a craft bound to a Northern port, the fugitive was almost certain of 
reaching that destination, and, once arrived, could hope for pro- 
tection from the 'Northern friends of whom vague rumors had 
penetrated the South. New laws, therefore, bore more and more 
heavily upon captains who should be found guilty of harboring 
a slave, and many cases were made public of cruel treatment 
experienced by slaves at the hands of captains who sent them di- 
rectly back. Nevertheless, escapes on shipboard still occurred fre- 
quently through the years of slavery. A method commonly used 
by women in getting on board was to disarm suspicion by appear- 
ing to be carrying some freshly laundered clothes to the sailors. 

§ 68. Use of protection papers. — Another method called for less 
physical effort on the part of the fugitive, but for greater coolness. 
It was simply to procure from some freeman his protection papers, 
and to show them whenever necessary to disarm suspicion. As 
the descriptions could seldom be made to agree, both giver and 
receiver were placed in situations of the greatest risk. It was thus, 
however, that Frederick Douglass travelled in the most open man- 
ner from Baltimore to New York, and escaped from a bondage to 
which he never afterward returned.^ 

§69. Fugitives disguised as whites: Craft case. — Sometimes the 
boldest plans succeeded best if supported by sufficient firmness 
and presence of mind. Three negroes possessed of a considerable 
sum of money once determined upon a plan, startling in its sim- 
plicity and success. They hired a good travelling coach and 
horses. They then bribed a white beggar to dress as a Virginian 

1 J. F. Clarke, Antislavery Days, 93. 

2 Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, 195. 



§§ 67-69] Fugitives disguised as Whites. 59 

gentleman, while they mounted the coach as his driver and footmen ; 
and in this guise they successfully made their way into Canada.^ 

Another example of unconcealed flight is found in the often told 
story of the escape of William and Ellen Craft, in 1848. They 
lived in Macon, Georgia, and were generally well treated. But 
Ellen had been compelled to go North with her mistress, and leave 
her little ,child at home; during this absence, the child died un- 
cared for. From that time she determined to escape.^ 

William at last arranged a plan which was successfully carried 
out. Ellen was nearly white. She personated a young Southern 
planter, while William accompanied her as her servant. She 
carried her right arm in a sling so that sjie might not be expected 
to write, bandaged her smooth face, and put on a pair of green gog- 
gles. Thus disguised, she succeeded in buying tickets for herself 
and servant without discovery. In the train she was terrified to 
see a gentleman who had known her from childhood. He even 
sat down by her, and spoke, but to her great relief, he saw in her 
only a young invalid going North for his health. From Savannah 
they took a steamer to Charleston. There they had some diffi- 
culty in passing inspection, but their most dangerous stopping 
place was Baltimore, where every white man with a slave was 
required to prove his right of property before he could be 
allowed to go on to Philadelphia. After some conversation Ellen 
told the officer that she knew no one in Baltimore, and had no 
proofs that William was her slave ; but that he was necessary to her 
on account of her illness, and she must take him on. The officer 
finally relented, as the train was about to start, and Baltimore was 
safely passed. 

At Philadelphia shelter was found among the Quakers, and 
thence they pushed on to Boston. Here they engaged the at- 
tention of Theodore Parker, and he protected them during their 
stay. William took up his trade of cabinet-making, while Ellen 
added to their income by sewing. They lived thus quietly until 
the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law in 1850. From that time, to 
remain even in Boston was hazardous. Soon after, there appeared 
one day in William's shop a man who had worked with him in the 
South. He immediately suspected the presence of others, and took 
refuge among friends. For two weeks Ellen was with Mr. Parker, 

1 Appendix D, No. 41 ; Antislavery Almanac, 74. 

2 J. F. Clarke, Antislavery Days, S3. 



6o F?tgitive Slaves : — Methods. [Ch. iv. 

who wrote his sermons during her stay with his sword in a drawer 
under his inkstand, and a pistol in his desk. 

They were then taken to Mr. EUis Gray Loring's home. Here 
William showed a most honorable spirit. When he found Mr. 
Loring was not at home he would not remain, saying, " I am sub- 
jecting him to a heavy fine and imprisonment, and I must go at 
once to look for some other shelter." 

His pursuers, who had come from Georgia, were staying at the 
United States Hotel. The knowledge of their object was soon 
spread abroad, and they dared not go into the streets for fear of a 
mob. Handbills, calling attention to them, were placed every- 
where, and cries of " Slave hunters ! there go the slave hunters ! " 
were heard on all sides. At last, they were absolutely compelled 
■ to leave the city. William and Ellen no longer felt safe, and 
therefore went to England, where the remainder of their life was 
spent in peace.^ 

§ 70. Underground Railroad. — From the preceding sketch of the 
conditions of escape, it is plain that no such numbers as are known 
to have fled could possibly have escaped from their masters' 
power had they depended solely upon their own exertions. From 
the beginning of the antislavery agitation, about 1830, and espe- 
cially near 1850, a mysterious organization made it a business to 
receive, forward, conceal, and protect fugitives. To that organisa- 
tion the name of " Underground Railroad " was given, and the 
many methods used by those connected with it can best be given 
under a more elaborate description of the system. 

§ 71. Rise and growth of the system. — The first efforts toward 
any systematic organization for the aid and protection of fugitive 
slaves are found among the Quakers in Pennsylvania. The great 
number of cases of kidnapping which occurred in this State after 
the passage of the law of 1793, by their injustice roused people to 
action in behalf of the free blacks; and, their sympathies once 
enlisted for the colored race, it was but a step to the aid of the 
fugitive negroes.2 Yrom this time, as the number of runaways 
increased, new agencies were constantly being established, until 
from the slave States to Canada a perfect chain of stations was 
arranged, not more than one day's journey apart^ The system is 

1 Appendix D, No. 41. 

2 Smedley, The Underground Railroad, 26. 

3 Lalor's Cyclopsedia, I. 5 ; Williams, History of the Negro Race in America, 
II. 58, 59. 



§§69-72.] The Underground Railroad. 61 

said to have extended from Kentucky and Virginia across Ohio, 
and from Maryland, through Pennsylvania and New York, to 
New England and Canada.^ 

As negroes began- to disappear, and their masters found them- 
selves unable to trace them farther than certain towns in Pennsyl- 
vania, they said, in bewilderment, " There must be an Underground 
Railroad somewhere," and this expression, suiting the popular 
fancy, became the general name by which the whole system was 
known.^ 

§ 72. Methods pursued. — Although often varied by circumstances, 
the general method of work was always the same. In the South, 
money was usually the motive, and for its sake the managers of 
the Railroad could usually get some one to aid a slave in escaping 
and crossing the line. In the North it was an unselfish, and some- 
times dangerous, work of charity. 

Fugitives arrived at the first station, ignorant, half-clothed, and 
hungry. There they were fed, and, in order to elude the adver- 
tisements sent through the States, disguises were provided. For 
women, the large veiled bonnet and plain attire of the Quakeress 
proved one of the best costumes. The men received a slip of 
paper, with a word or two which would be recognized at the next 
place, and, unless special caution was needed, were sent forward on 
foot. Women and children were often taken in close carriages, 
sometimes constructed for this special purpose.^ 

Stations, that is, the houses of persons known to be interested, 
were reached between sunset and ten o'clock in the evening. A 
tap at the door would rouse some member of the family, and the 
fugitive would be taken to the barn, or some place of conceal- 
ment.* Often, too, these houses were not merely places for a 
night's tarrying, but homes where the ill and fatigued might remain 
and be cared for until strong enough for the onward journey.^ 

To conduct people over this long line, and to baffle all plans of 
their pursuers, required quick wit, as well as great courage and cool- 
ness.*" So successful were the conductors in this respect, however, 
that a discouraged slave hunter, after a fruitless search, once said it 
was " as easy to find a needle in a haymow as a negro among 
Quakers." "* 

1 Clarke, Antislavery Days, 8i. 

2 Smedley, The Underground Railroad, 35. ^ Ibid., 64, 138. 
* Ibid., 568-570. 6 Ibid., 172. ^ Ibid., 34. 

^ Ibid., 146. 



62 Fugitive Slaves : — Methods. [Ch. iv. 

When fugitives were concealed, and persons desiring to search 
the house appeared, it was the custom to receive the searchers cour- 
^ teously. One of the family immediately engaged them in conver- 
sation, and offered them refreshments. The htint was thus delayed 
as long as possible, so that the fugitive might be helped away. In 
one case, while the slave's master was thus entertained upon the 
front piazza, the mistress of the house quietly conveyed the hunted 
negro out at the back door, and placed him under an inverted hogs- 
head standing by. Then, with the most unconcerned manner, she 
allowed the man to search until he was satisfied that there could be 
no fugitive in that house.^ 

§ 73. Colored agents of the Underground Railroad. — An example 
of the most courageous and successful action may be found in the 
life of Harriet Tubman,^ who when a young girl made her escape 
from slavery alone and unassisted. After several years of work in 
the North, she determined to go back for her family. This trip was 
safely accomplished, and followed by others, until during her life 
she had made nineteen journeys, never losing a person. The 
Rev. James Freeman Clarke gives the following account of her 
methods : — 

" She said she first obtained enough money, then went to Mary- 
land, where she privately collected a party of slaves and got them 
ready to start. She satisfied herself that they had enough courage 
and firmness to run the risks. For if once a negro entered her 
party, there was no falling back. Fully determined herself, she 
would allow no one to return. 

" She next made arrangements so that they should set out 
Saturday night, as there would be no opportunity on Sunday for 
advertising them, so that they had that day's start on their way 
North. Then she had places prepared where she could be sure 
that they could be protected and taken care of, if she had the 
money to pay for that protection. When she was at the North, 
she tried to raise funds until she got a certain amount, and then 
went South to carry out this plan. She always paid some colored 
man to follow after the person who put up the posters advertising 
the runaway, and pull them down as fast as they were put up." ^ 

When she feared the party were closely pursued, she would take 
them for a time on a train southward bound, as no one seeing a 

1 Rmedley, Underground Railroad, 5S. 2 Harriet, the Moses of her People. 

8 Clarke, Antislavery Days, 81. 



§§ 72-75-] Operations " Underground^ 63 

company of negroes going in this direction would for an instant 
suppose them to be fugitives. As their leader out of bondage, 
her people gave her the name of " Moses," and thus she is gener- 
ally known. 

§ 74. Prosecutions of agents. — Such acts as those daily performed 
by the conductors on the Underground Railroad could not be 
carried on under the existing laws without leading to prosecutions. 
Large rewards were many times offered for Harriet's capture, but 
she eluded all efforts to stop her work. At one time the Mary- 
land legislature offered a reward to any person who should secure 
Thomas Garrett in any public jail in the State. He was a Dela- 
ware Quaker, who, it is said, helped twenty-nine hundred slaves 
in escaping. The Governor was required to employ the best legal 
skill to prosecute him on the charge of aiding runaways.^ He 
was afterward tried and fined a sum which consumed his entire 
property. As this was paid, the officer who received it said that 
he hoped the remembrance of this punishment would prevent 
any further trouble. Mr. Garrett, undaunted, replied that they 
had taken all that he possessed, but added, " If thee knows any 
poor fugitive who wants a breakfast, send him to me." ^ In fact, he 
seemed absolutely fearless. Angry slaveholders often called upon 
him, and demanded their property. He never denied knowledge 
of their slaves, or of having helped them on their way, but, in the 
most quiet manner, positively refused to give information con- 
cerning them.^ 

§ 75. Formal organization. — In 1838 the first formal organiza- 
tion of the Underground Railroad was made, with Robert Purvis 
as President. It was said that two marketwomen in Baltimore 
were their best helpers. They had come into possession of a 
number of passports, or " freedoms," which were used by slaves 
for part of the distance, and then were returned to serve the same 



purpose again * 



In all transactions connected with this organization the greatest 
secrecy was necessarily observed, seldom more than two or three 
persons at a station being allowed any knowledge of it. In the 
Liberator of 1843, a notice is found cautioning people against 
exposing in any way the methods used by fugitives in escaping, as 

^ Liberator, March 2, iS6o. 

2 Pamphlet proposing a Defensive League of Freedom, 6. 

8 Smedley, Underground Railroad, 241. * Ibid., 355. 



$4 Fugitive Slaves : — Methods. [Ch. iv. 

it only helped the pursuers in the next case. The fugitives them- 
selves were usually careful in this respect. Frederick Douglass 
absolutely refused until after the abolition of slavery to reveal 
the method of his escape.^ 

Mrs. G. S. Hillard, of Boston, was in the habit of putting fugi- 
tives in an upper room of her house. A colored man was placed 
there, and when Mrs. Hillard went up to see him, she found he 
had carefully pulled down all the shades at the windows. She told 
him that there was no danger of his being seen from the street. 
" Perhaps not, Missis," he replied, " but I do not want to spoil 
the place." He was afraid lest some one might see a colored face 
there, and so excite suspicions injurious to the next man.^ 

§ yG. General effect of escapes. — Although many fugitives were 
aided previous to 1850, it was after the new law went into effect 
that the great efforts of the Abolitionists were centred on this 
form of assistance. Of such importance did it become, that at 
the beginning of the Civil War one of the chief complaints of the 
Southern States was the injury received through the aid given 
their escaping slaves by the North .^ 

It was, however, really the " safety valve to the institution of 
slavery. As soon as leaders arose among the slaves who refused 
to endure the yoke, they would go North. Had they remained, 
there must have been enacted at the South the direful scenes of 
San Domingo."* 

1 Douglass, My Bondage and Freedom, 323. 

2 J. F. Clarke, Antislavery Days, 83. 

8 Lalor's Cyclopaedia, I. 5; Congressional Globe, 36 Cong, i Sess., Appendix, 250. 
* Williams, History of the Negro Race in America, II. 58, 59. 



CHAPTER V, 
PERSONAL LIBERTY LAWS. 

§ 77. Character of the personal liberty laws. 

§ 78. Acts passed before the Prigg decision (i 793-1842). 

§ 79. Acts passed between the Prigg decision and the second Fugitive Slave 

Law (1842-1850). 
§ 80. Acts occasioned by the law of 1850 (1850-1860). 
§ 81. Massachusetts acts. 
§ 82. Review of the acts by States. 
§ 83. Effect of the personal liberty laws. 

§ 'jj. Character of the personal liberty laws. — The personal lib- 
erty laws were statutes passed in the Northern States whose ob- 
ject was to defeat in some measure the national Fugitive Slave 
Law. Often their ostensible purpose was to protect the free ne- 
groes from kidnappers, and to this end they secured for the alleged 
fugitive the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, and the trial 
by jury. Sometimes, however, they frankly avowed their aim as 
a deliberate attempt to interfere with the execution of the United 
States statutes. In the following examination of these laws, they 
will be considered first chronologically, and afterward more mi- 
nutely according to their subject matter. In previous chapters 
we have noticed many instances wherein fugitives have been be- 
friended by individuals, or by organizations like the Antislavery 
Societies or the Underground Railroad. But the action of the 
State governments in the personal liberty bills, from the time the 
Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 began to be executed to the outbreak 
of the Civil War, showed that the dissatisfaction of the North was 
fundamental, and was not confined merely to the few in the van of 
the Antislavery movement. 

§ 'jZ. Acts passed before the Prigg decision (1793-1842). — Although 
the so-called personal liberty laws were not passed until about 
1840, Indiana 1 and Connecticut ^ had before that time provided 
that on appeal fugitives might have a trial by jury. The Con- 
necticut law, in contrast to the hostile spirit of later legislation, was 

1 Revised Laws of Indiana, 1824, p. 221. "- Laws of Connecticut, 1S3S. p. 32. 

165] 



66 Fugitive Slaves: — Liberty Bills. [Ch. iv. 

entitled, " An Act for the fulfilment of the obligation of this State 
imposed by the Constitution of the United States in regard to 
persons held to service or labor in one State escaping into an- 
other, and to secure the right of trial by jury in the cases herein 
mentioned." Notwithstanding this preamble, the law provided for 
fining State officials who might take part in fugitive slave cases. 

The first definite personal liberty laws were passed by Ver- 
mont ^ and New York,Mn 1840, and were entitled Acts "to ex- 
tend the right of trial by jury." They not only insured jury trial, 
but also provided attorneys to defend fugitives. This was the 
only law of the kind New York ever passed, and proved of little 
value, since it soon fell into disuse, and was almost forgotten. 

§ 79. Acts passed between the Prigg decision and the second Fugitive 
Slave Law (1842-1850). — After the Prigg decision in 1842, wherein 
it was declared that the law must be executed through national 
powers only, and that State authorities could not be forced into 
action,^ a new class of statutes sprang up. The State legislatures 
seized the opportunity aff'orded them by; Judge Story's opinion, 
to forbid State officers from perform.ing the duties required of 
them by the law of 1793, and prohibited the use of State jails 
in fugitive slave cases. Such laws were passed in Massachusetts,^ 
Vermont,^ Pennsylvania,^ and Rhode Island." In 1844, Connecti- 
cut repealed her act of 1838, as being then unconstitutional, but 
retained the portion forbidding State officers to participate in the 
execution of the law. 

§ 80. Acts occasioned hy the law of 1850 (1850-1860). — The pro- 
visions of the law of 1850 roused yet more opposition in the 
North, and before 1856 many of the States had passed personal 
liberty bills. The new national law avoided the employment of 
State officers. This change in the statute brought about a cor- 
responding alteration in the State legislation, and we therefore 
find the acts of this period diff"ering somewhat from those of 
earlier years. They almost invariably prohibited the use of State 
jails, they often forbade State judges and officers to issue writs or 
to give assistance to the claimant, and punished severely the seiz- 
ure of a free person with the intent to reduce him to slavery. 

1 Acts and Resolves of Vermont, 1840, p. 13. " Laws of New York, 1S40, p. 174. 

8 See ante, § 27. * Laws of Massachusetts, 1S43, p. 33. 

6 Acts and Resolves of Vermont, 1S43, p. 11. 

* Laws of Pennsylvania, 1847, P- 206. 

1 Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, 1S48, p. 12. 



§§7S-Si. Analysis. 6^ 

Should an alleged fugitive be arrested, the personal liberty acts 
were intended to secure him a trial surrounded by the usual legal 
safeguards. The identity of the person claimed was to be proved 
by two witnesses ; or they gave him the right to a writ of habeas 
corpus; or they enjoined upon the court to which the writ was 
returnable a trial by jury. At the trial the prisoner must be 
defended by an attorney, frequently the State or county attorney, 
and a penalty was provided for false testimony. Any violation of 
these clauses by State officers was punished by penalties varying 
from five hundred dollars and six months in jail, as in Pennsyl- 
vania, to the maximum punishment in Vermont, of two thousand 
dollars' fine and ten years in prison. 

Such acts were passed in Vermont,^ Connecticut,^ and Rhode 
Island,'^ in Massachusetts,* Michigan,^ and Maine.^ Later, laws 
were also enacted in Wisconsin," Kansas," Ohio,® and Pennsylva- 
niaJ Of the other Northern States, two only, New Jersey and 
California, gave any official sanction to the rendition of fugitives. 
In New Hampshire, New York, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, and Min- 
nesota, however, no full personal liberty laws were passed.^ 

§ 8i. Massachusetts acts. — Let us now examine the purport of 
these acts in the various States. The general tenor and effect are 
best seen in Massachusetts, which may be selected as a typical 

1 Laws of Vermont, 1S50, p. 9. 

2 Public Acts of Connecticut, 1S54, p. So. 
8 Laws of Rhode Island, 1854, p. 22. 

* Laws of Massachusetts, 1855, p. 924; 1S5S, p. 151. 

6 Laws of Michigan, 1855, p. 415. 

6 Laws of Maine, 1857, p. 38. "^ Lalor, IIL 162. 

8 Laws of Ohio, 1857, p. 170; 1858, p. 10. 

^ The following tabulation shows the provisions of the personal liberty laws as 
distributed among the States : — 

yiid'c;es and justices forbidden to take cognizance. Massachusetts, 1843, Vermont, 1S43; 
Connecticut, 1S38; Rhode Island, 1854; Maine, 1855; Pennsylvania, 1847. 

Writ of habeas corpjis. Massachusetts, 1S55 , Michigan, 1855, Maine, 1S57 , Con- 
necticut, 1838 and 1844. 

Jury trial. Indiana, 1824; New York, 1S40; Vermont, 1840, 1850, and 1858; Con- 
necticut, 1838; Michigan, 1855; Massachusetts, 1855. 

Use of jails forbidden. Massachusetts, 1843 and 1855; Vermont, 1843 ^"^ 185S; 
Pennsylvania, 1847; Rhode Island, 1848; Maine, 1855; Michigan, 1855; Ohio, 1857. 

Attorneys employed to defend fugitives. New York, 1840; Vermont, 1S40, Massachu- 
setts, 1855; Maine, 1857. 

False testimony punished. Connecticut, 1838 and 1844; Michigan, 1855. 

Admission of national officers. Connecticut, 1838 and 1S44, Vermont, 1S44; Maine, 
1855; New Hampshire, 1S57. 



68 Fugitive Slaves : — Liberty Bills. [Ch. v. 

State. In 1837, Massachusetts passed a law "to restore the trial 
by jury, on questions of personal freedom." This secured to the 
prisoner a writ of personal replevin, which was to be issued from 
and returnable to the Court of Common Pleas for the county in 
which the plaintiff was confined, and was to be issued fourteen 
days at least before the return day. If the prisoner were se- 
creted, the court might send out a capias to take the body of the 
defendant. This act allowed an appeal to the Supreme Judicial 

Court. 

In 1842, the Latimer case ^ occurred. This so aroused public 
sentiment that a great petition, signed by sixty-five thousand peo- 
ple, was sent to the legislature, asking for a new personal liberty 
law. On the basis of the Prigg decision, a law was enacted which 
forbade State magistrates to issue certificates or take cognizance 
of the law of 1793, and withheld the use of State jails for the im- 
prisonment of fugitives.^ 

In 185 1, in the Shadrach case,^ there was opportunity for testing 
the value of this law. The fugitive was not indeed confined in any 
jail, but there was little difficulty in providing a place of detention, 
and the court-house was secured. In this year, acting upon a 
clause in the Governor's message, which treated of the new Fugi- 
tive Slave Law of 1850, a committee in the legislature made a 
report, accompanied by resolutions and a bill further to protect 
personal liberty; but no law was passed, and there the matter 
rested until 1855.* 

After the Sims^ and Burns ^ cases, in which the court-houses 
were again used in the place of jails, the heat of public indigna- 
tion led to petitions to the legislature asking for a more stringent 
personal liberty law. A joint committee prepared a bill, which 
was passed, but was vetoed by Governor Gardner, who had been 
advised by the Attorney General that some of the clauses were 
unconstitutional. But so strong was the influence in its favor 
that it was passed over the veto by a two- thirds vote.^ The 
feeling that it was probably unconstitutional, however, must have 
strengthened in the next three years: for in 1858^ we find another 

1 See ante, § 44. ^ Laws of Massachusetts, 1843, p. 33. 

3 See ante, § 57. * Parker, Personal Liberty Laws, 27. 

6 See ante, § 54. ^ See ante, § 55. 

' Parker, Personal Liberty Laws, 27 ; Laws of Massachusetts, 1S55, P- 9-4'. Ap- 
pendix D, No. 60, case of William Johnson. 
« Laws of Massachusetts, 1S5S, p. 151. 



§§8i-S2.] Review of the Acts by States. 69 

act which amended the act of 1855. This hmited some provisions, 
and repealed the following sections : the tenth, which required that 
any person who should give a certificate that a person claimed as 
a fugitive was a slave should forfeit any State office he might hold ; 
the deventh, which forbade any person acting as attorney for a 
claimant to appear as counsel or attorney in the State courts; the 
twelfth, which made a violation of the preceding section sufficient 
ground for the impeachment of any officer of the Commonwealth; 
tlie thirteenth, which forbade any United States officer empowered 
to give certificate or issue warrants from holding a State office ; 
and'' the fourteenth, which made liable to removal any person 
holding a State judicial office who should also hold the office of 
Commissioner. 

§ 82. Review of the acts by States. — Of the other New England 
States, Maine had no personal liberty law until 1855.1 Two years 
after, however, in 1857,2 a portion of an act declaring free all slaves 
brought by their masters into that State was devoted to a provision 
" to punish any attempt to exercise authority over them." 

In New Hampshire, one of the laws of 18573 enacted that every 
person holding any person as a slave for any length of time, under 
any pretence, should be deemed guilty of felony; but provided 
that this should not apply to United States officers executing any 

legal process. 

Vermont, by an act in 1840,'^ extended to fugitives the right of 
trial by jury, but after three years this was repealed,^ only to be 
renewed in 1850.^ 

Connecticut, as has been noticed, had no personal liberty law. 
Rhode Island first passed such an act in 1848.' This forbade 
State officers to take cognizance of fugitive slave cases, and the 
use of State jails. Another statute, in 1854,' extended these pro- 
visions so as to apply to the national law of 1850. 

The act of 1840 was the only Personal Liberty Law of New 
York.9 Pennsvlvania, some seven years later, forbade the use of 
jails, and punished State officers for participating in fugitive slave 

1 Acts and Resolves of Maine, 1855, p. 207. ^ Ibid., 1S57, p. 38. 

a Acts and Resolves of New- Hampshire, 1857, p. 1876. 

« Acts and Resolves of Vermont, 1S40, p. 13- 

5 Laws of Vermont, 1843, P- "• ' ^^^^^ '^5°' P" 9- 

7 Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, 1S48, p. 12. 

8 Laws of Rhode Island, 1854, p. 22. 

9 Laws of New York, 1840, p. i74- 



70 Fugitive Slaves : — = Liberty Bills. [Ch. v. 

cases. -^ It also enacted a regulation of the same character as late 
as i860. 

Ohio made but one provision on the subject, and that lasted but 
a year. Her jails were closed to suspected slaves in 1857,^ but in 
1858 this law was repealed.^ 

Michigan passed such an act in 1855,'* with the usual clauses on 
the use of jails and jury trial, and imposed a fine on false testimony 
against the defendant. 

In 1858 Wisconsin and Kansas also passed similar acts.^ 

§ 83. Effect of the personal liberty laws. — Since the avowed 
purpose of these laws was to obstruct the execution of one of the 
United States statutes, national and State legislation were thus 
brought into direct conflict; but the Fugitive Slave Law was held 
constitutional by the Supreme Court, and any attempt to prevent 
its enforcement by positive means, however righteous from an 
ethical standpoint, must be considered an infraction of the Consti- 
tution, and of the common understanding between the States, on 
which the Union was founded. ° The provisions denying the use of 
State institutions and officers, though distinctly unfriendly, were 
not unconstitutional. Many of the Abolitionists, however, held the 
national law to be unconstitutional, and at the same time morally 
so repugnant that it ought never to be executed.'' The State 
laws were brought up by South Carolina, in her declaration of 
the causes of secession, as one of the chief grievances against the 
North; and President Buchanan, in his Message of 1860,^ said they 
were " the most palpable violations of constitutional duty which 
had yet been committed." They must certainly be classed in prin- 
ciple with the Nullification Ordinance of 1832. Indeed, the legis- 
lature of Wisconsin, after the Supreme Court had overridden the 
decision of the State courts in the case of Ableman v. Booth that 
the national law was contrary to the national Constitution, passed 
some resolutions in which a " positive defiance is urged as the 
' rightful remedy ' " against such legislation.^ 

1 Laws of Pennsylvania, 1S47, p. 206. - Laws of Ohio, 1857, p. 170. 

3 Laws of Ohio, 185S, p. 10. * Laws of Michigan, 1S55, p. 415. 

5 Lalor, in. 162. 

8 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II. 763; Von Hoist, IV. 551 ; Parker, 
Personal Liberty Laws. 

7 Phillips, No Slave Hunting in the Old Bay State ; Phillips, Argument against 
repeal of Personal Liberty Law ; Pierce, Personal Liberty Law, 4 ; Johnson, Speech 
on Personal Liberty Law, New York, 1861. 

8 36 Cong. 2 Bess., Congressional Globe, Appendix, 2. *> Lalor, III. 162. 



CHAPTER VI. 

THE END OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE QUESTION 

{1860-1865). 

§ 85. The Fugitive Slave Law in the crisis of 1S60-61. 

§ 86. Propositions to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law. 

§ 87. Propositions to repeal or amend the law. 
§ 88. The question of slaves of rebels. 

§ 89. Slavery attacked in Congress. 
§ 90. Confiscation bills. 
§ 91. Confiscation provisions extended. 

§ 92. Effect of the Emancipation Proclamation (1S63). 
§ 93. Fugitives in loyal slave States. 

§ 94. Typical cases. 

§ 95- Question discussed in Congress. 

§ 96. Arrests by civil officers. 
§ 97. Denial of the use of jails in the District of Columbia. 

§ 98. Abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. 

§ 99. Regulations against kidnapping. 
§ 100. Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Acts. 

§ loi. Early propositions to repeal the acts. 

§ 102. Discussion of the repeal bill in the House. 

§ 103. Repeal bills in the Senate. 

§ 104. The repeal act and the thirteenth amendment. 
§ 105. Educating effect of the controversy. 

§ 85. The Fugitive Slave Law in the crisis of 1860-61.— If the 
number of interesting fugitive slave cases falls off in the latter part 
of the decade from 1850 to i860, it is not because the law was 
better enforced, but because it was little enforced. The continued 
interference of the friends of the slave had proved that a fugitive 
could not safely be recovered in Massachusetts, and that no pun- 
ishment could be secured for those who helped him to his free- 
dom. The personal liberty bills added serious legal obstacles. 
The Supreme Court of Wisconsin even went so far as to declare 
the national act of 1850 unconstitutional.^ In 1859 John Brown, in 
his Harper's Ferry raid, attempted to establish a centre to which 

1 Ableman v. Booth, 3 Wis., I. 
[71] 



'^2 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. 

fugitives might flock ; and although he was defeated, he had the 
sympathy of a large number of persons in the North, including 
some public men. 

In the violent debates of 1 860-61, one of the frequent charges 
brought by the southern members against the North was its per- 
sistent refusal to execute the Fugitive Slave Act, or to permit it to 
be executed.-^ Even Republican members disclaimed responsi- 
bility for their party, and urged that the personal liberty bills 
should be repealed.^ Other bolder spirits seized the opportunity 
to urge a repeal of the act, and in the various compromise propo- 
sitions introduced were several attempts to modify the existing 
constitutional provision on the subject. 

§ 86. Propositions to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law. — In the crisis 
of i860 the South seemed to expect a general settlement of the 
slavery question like that of 1850, and therefore demanded a more 
effective act for the return of fugitives. President Buchanan, in his 
message of December 4, i860, recommended " explanatory " con- 
stitutional amendments which should recognize the master's right 
to the recovery of his fugitive slaves, and the validity of the Fugi- 
tive Slave Law. He recommended also a declaration against State 
laws impairing the right of the master, as being violations of the 
Constitution, and consequently null and void.^ This recommenda- 
tion was followed, December 12, i860, by no less than eleven resolu- 
tions upon the subject in the House,^ Of these five were constitu- 
tional amendments. Several provided, as a pacific measure, that 
the town, county, or State, guilty of neglect to return a fugitive, might 
be sued by the owner of the slave for the amount thus lost to him.^ 
The most arbitrary proposition was that of Mr. Hindman. It 
denied representation in Congress to any State which should hold 
in force laws hindering the delivery of fugitives.^ 

Another resolution inquired into the expediency of declaring it 

' Globe, 1S60-61, p. 356, App. 197. 

2 Globe, 1S60-61, (Baker) 228, (Burnham) 970. 

3 Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., p. 18. Appendi.v C, No. i. 

* House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., p. 60 ; Congr. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 77. Ap- 
pendix C, Nos. 2-12. For a list of proposed constitutional amendments bearing on 
fugitive slaves, I am indebted to Mr. H. V. Ames, of the Harvard Graduate School, 
who has kindly furnished me transcripts from his material for a forthcoming monograph 
on proposed amendments to the Constitution. 

^ Cong. Globe, 3 Cong. 2 Sess., 114. Appendix C, Nos. 2-12. 

6 House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 70 ; Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 79. Ai> 
pendix C, No. 10. 



§§ 85-S8.] Enforcement. Slaves of Disloyal Men. 73 

felony to resist an officer of the United States in the execution of 
the law, or to attempt to rescue a runaway. ^ 

§ 87. Propositions to repeal or amend the law. — On the other hand, 
antislavery members insisted that the provision for the return of 
fugitives was already too severe ; but only one of the resolutions 
proposed any amendment in favor of the slave. Mr. Kilgore pro- 
posed to give a trial by jury before a fugitive should be returned.^ 

As early as i860 Mr. Blake had introduced into the House a bill 
to repeal the law of 1850. It was read twice, and referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary, from whom it was never reported.^ 
At that time Congress, in alarm at the state of the country, was 
vainly striving to mend matters by making the Fugitive Slave Law 
even more effective. March i, 1861, the select committee of 
thirty-three brought in a bill for the amendment of the law of 
1850; it allowed an appeal to the Circuit Court of the United 
States where jury trial was to be given. The bill passed the 
House the same day ; but in the Senate it never got beyond the 
first reading.* 

§ 88. The c«uestion of slaves of rebels. — With the beginning of the 
Civil War in 186 1 the last period in the study of fugitive slaves 
opens, to close only with the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Law and 
the abolition of slavery. 

New conditions now surrounded the slaves. Their masters were 
away in the army; many homes were broken up, and confusion 
reigned instead of law ; the strict discipline and oversight necessary 
for the maintenance of the slave system was impossible. Oppor- 
tunities for escape occurred everywhere and at all times. Since 
war had brought the Northern people down into their own land, the 
slave no longer needed to travel hundreds of miles to find friends; 
the Northern camps were perhaps but a few miles from his own 
plantation. In this way negroes began to gather around the 
Federal camps in such numbers that the question of disposing of 
them became serious. If the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 were 
considered as still binding, their apprehension and return were 
necessary ; but many of the masters were in arms against the gov- 
ernment; should they still be protected in their property? The 

1 House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 67 ; Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., ■]■]. Ap- 
pendi.x C, No. 3. 

'•2 House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 70; Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 7S. Ap- 
pendix C, No. II. 

3 Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 132S. * Appendix C, No. 25. 



74 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Efided. [Ch. vl 

belligerent position of the South seemed to preclude any right on 
the part of disloyal owners to ask for the benefit of the law. 

To meet the changed conditions no policy had as yet been 
developed by the government. The first solution of the problem 
was made at Fortress Monroe by General Butler. He drew an 
analogy from international law, which makes material of war im- 
ported into the country of a belligerent lawful prize to the army 
or navy of the other belligerent. Regarded as property, the slaves 
of rebels could be of great service to them, and of equal help to 
the government in suppressing rebellion. Regarded as persons, 
they had escaped from communities where rebellion was in progress, 
and they asked protection from the government to which they were 
still loyal. In May, 1861, General Butler therefore replied to all 
demands for fugitives that he should retain them as " contraband 
of war." The answer was widely spread, and " contraband " became 
the name by which such negroes were known. ^ 

§ 89. Slavery attacked in Congress. — A series of attacks upon 
slavery now began in Congress. To many persons the fact that 
the institution was recognized in the Constitution seemed sufficient 
ground for protecting it. No doubt was entertained of the power 
of Congress to confiscate the ordinary property of rebels ; but such 
persons deprecated all interference with slaves, who were supposed 
to possess a kind of constitutional immunity, wholly unknown to 
and above all other property.'^ In the minds of antislavery men, 
" no greater fallacy was ever asserted than this attempt thus to 
link ' the institution ' and the Constitution indissolubly together, 
to engraft the former upon the latter, to make slavery the corner 
stone of the nation, to be guarded and protected by the govern- 
ment."^ Nevertheless, the existence of slavery in the Border States 
which had remained loyal made Congress very cautious as to 
general enactments. On the other hand, no form of property held 
by rebels was so vulnerable ; slaves could not only be seized as the 
lines of the Northern troops extended, they could, by actual law or 
by kindly reception, be invited across the lines. Both the pas- 
sions aroused by civil war and a humane pity for the slave urged 
the government to deprive the master engaged in secession of the 
services of his slave. 

1 Liberator, Nov. i, iS6i ; Edvv. L. Pierce, in Atlantic Monthly, November, iS6i. 

2 Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1076. 

3 Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1077. 



§§SS-9i.] Confiscation Bills. 75 

§90. Confiscation bills. — July 18, 1861, Mr. Chandler and Mr. 
Trumbull introduced general confiscation bills in the Senate ; they 
were both referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. In the dis- 
cussion Mr. Trumbull offered as an amendment " that whenever any 
person claiming to be entitled to the service or labor of any other 
person, under the laws of any State, shall employ such person in 
aiding or promoting any insurrection, or in resisting the laws of the 
United States, or shall permit or suffer him to be so employed, he 
shall forfeit all right to such service or labor, and the person whose 
service or labor is thus claimed shall be thenceforth discharged 
therefrom, any law to the contrary notwithstanding." ^ 

The proposition aroused considerable opposition, since it was a 
step far in advance of anything which had yet been done against 
the interests of slavery, and any proposition which advocated " an 
act of emancipation," however limited and qualified, was the signal 
for hot discussion. The opposing party announced that " nothing 
will come of it but more irritation," ^ and in each crisis statesmen 
should " observe all possible toleration, all conciliation, all liber- 
ality." ^ Mr. Wilson upheld the opposite opinion, and thought 
that the time had come when this government, and the men 
who are in arms under the government, should cease to return 
their fugitive slaves to traitors. 

The bill passed the Senate July 22, 1861. In the House it was 
amended so as to limit the negroes to be freed more strictly to 
those employed in military service.* The bill went back to the 
Senate, which concurred in the amendment,^ and it received the 
signature of the President, August 6, 1861.'^ 

§ 91. Confiscation provisions extended. — Propositions more far 
reaching were introduced into the Senate in the session of 1861- 
(Si? January 15, 1862, Mr. Trumbull, from the Committee on the 
Judiciary, to whom the various propositions had been referred, 
reported an original bill, and asked that the committee be dis- 
charged from the consideration of others.^ March 14, 1862, Mr. 

1 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 21S. Appendix C, Nos. 30, 31. 

2 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 219. 

3 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 412. 

* House Journal, 37 Cong, i Sess., 197 ; Cong. Globe, 409, 410. Appendix C, 
No. 31. 

5 Senate Journal, 37 Cong, i Sess., 17S ; Cong. Globe, 434. Apj^endix C, No. 31. 

6 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 454. Appendix C, No. 31. 

■? Appendix C, Nos. 37, 40, 44. ^ Appendix C, No. 52. 



^6 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. 

Harris introduced into the Senate a bill to confiscate the property 
of rebels and for other purposes.^ These propositions were con- 
sidered at length, but never came to a vote. It is not necessary 
to enter here into the discussion of confiscations and of the consti- 
tutional right of Congress to free the slaves ; in most of the bills 
there was a provision against the return of slaves to disloyal 
masters. 

The Harris bill declared that, before any order for the surrender 
of fugitives should be given, the claimant must establish not only 
his title to the slave, as was then provided by law, but also that he 
is and has been loyal to the United States during the Rebellion. 
Mr. Pomeroy objected to this because it would make it " obliga- 
tory on the government of the United States to surrender a person 
claimed to be indebted to another for service or labor, if the claim- 
ant proves that he is loyal to the government. Would not this re- 
enact the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 P"^ An amendment was 
therefore adopted which so changed the law that any reference to 
the act of 1850 was avoided.-^ After several debates the proposi- 
tion was recommitted. May 6.^ Mr. Clark reported a bill, May 
14, which retained the provision in regard to fugitives as at first 
offered.^ 

In the House, resolutions on confiscation and emancipation were 
offered on the first day of the session, but the final action was 
based upon one of several bills introduced by Mr. Eliot, May 14, 
1862.6 His first bill, upon the confiscation of the property of the 
rebels, need not be followed out here; but the second bill pro- 
vided for the emancipation of the slaves of disloyal masters, and 
forbade their return as fugitives. After various recommitments'^ 
a bill was brought in, according to which, in any suit brought 
by a claimant to recover the possession of slaves to enforce such 
service or labor, it was to be a sufficient bar to allege and prove that 
the master was disloyal to the government.^ The bill then passed 
the House by a vote of 82 to 54.^ 

1 Appendix C, No. 59. Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and reported 
by them, April 16, 1862. Appendix C, No. 67. 

- Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 944. 

8 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 946, 

4 Appendix C, No. 71. ^ Appendix C, No. 72. 

6 Appendix C, No. 73. Previous bills introduced by Mr. Eliot had been unfavorably 
reported on by the Judiciary Committee. Appendix C, No. 6g. 

■^ Appendix C, No. 75. 8 Appendix C, No. 78. 



§§91-93-] T^^>-^ Emancipation Proclamation. yy 

When it came up in the Senate, 'June 23, 1862, Mr. Clark moved 
to strike out all after the enacting clause, and to insert a substitute 
which would again unite the ''confiscation and emancipation bills. 
This amendment was rejected by the House, and a conference com- 
mittee was appointed which reported July ii and 12. The fugitive 
from a disloyal master was by this compromise to be deemed a 
captive of war, and forever freed from servitude.^ The report was 
adopted by both houses, and approved by the President, July 17, 
1862.^ From that date any slave of a disloyal master who could 
make his way into the territory occupied by the Northern troops 
was ipso facto free. The fugitive was to become a freeman. 

§ 92. Effect of the Emancipation Proslamation (1863). — The complete 
emancipation of the negroes within the Confederate lines was the 
next logical step, and was demanded as a war measure. It de- 
prived the Confederacy of the aid of these slaves, and at the same 
time made it possible to arm and employ the former slaves against 
their masters. September 22, 1862, President Lincoln issued his 
preliminary proclamation, by which he warned the South that, 
unless it should return to its allegiance, all persons held as slaves 
in the States in rebellion on the 1st of January, 1863, should be 
" thenceforth and forever free." 

At the end of one hundred days the final and absolute Proclama- 
tion was put forth, January i, 1863. It declared also that negroes 
might be received into the armed service of the United States ; and 
henceforth throughout the war, the former slaves were enrolled as 
soldiers and did good service for the government. 

The effect of this proclamation was to end slavery, and with it 
the return of fugitives, within the Confederate lines. But here 
the legal machinery of the government had no effect ; the State 
laws relating to slavery might be considered suspended, but prac- 
tically the laws and practices of the Confederacy prevailed. On 
the other hand, the Fugitive Slave Law yet existed upon the statute- 
book where the Union had power ; the arrest and imprisonment of 
fugitives was yet legal, and many desired to see the law repealed 
as another step toward the final crushing out of the system. 

§ 93. Fugitives in loyal slave States. — From the beginning of the 
war one of the most embarrassing questions which had come before 
Congress was, How shall the slaves of loyal owners be treated ? The 
necessity of holding the Border States firm for the Union disposed 

^ Appendix C, No. 79. 



78 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. 

many to support only the most conciliatory measures ; but these 
States were a part of the theatre of war. Northern armies now oc- 
cupied parts of the Confederacy as well, and among the great num- 
bers of blacks who flocked to the Union camp it was impossible to 
separate the slaves of the loyal from the disloyal. Moreover, it 
was necessary that there should be some uniformity of method. 
Without specific law, the reception given to fugitives from loyal 
masters must vary with the views of each commanding officer with 
whom they sought refuge. 

§ 94. Typical cases. — Cases began to occur very early in the 
struggle. In 1861 a slave called Wisdom ran away from George- 
town, and was taken in by some wagoners belonging to the North- 
ern army. He soon found work, but his master succeeded in 
tracing him, and came to camp to claim him. He demanded the 
slave of Captain Swan, officer of the day. Captain Swan hoped the 
man might be smuggled away, and so delayed the search as long 
as possible. The master then went to Colonel Cowden, who im- 
mediately ordered the slave to be surrendered, without the form of 
proceedings prescribed by the act of 1850, and in disregard of the 
fact that the master was not provided with the necessary certificate. 
When the facts became known in Massachusetts and elsewhere, 
there was great indignation. The Colonel was hung in ^^^y in 
Boston, with the following inscription : " Colonel Cowden, of Burns 
rendition notoriety, is now practising his tricks at kidnapping in 
Washington." ^ 

Major Sherwood of the nth West Virginia Regiment had, in 
1 861, employed a colored refugee as his servant. The owner sent 
a United States marshal to Brigadier General Boyle, who gave an 
order for his rendition. Major Sherwood sent a message that he 
would give up his sword, but, while he was in command, no fugi- 
tive should be returned. He was placed under arrest for disobe- 
dience, to await court-martial ; but General Staunton ordered 
General Boyle's order revoked, and Major Sherwood was never 
tried. In the mean time the boy had been sent away concealed 
under the seat of an ambulance, and reached Canada in safety.^ 

§ 95. Question discussed in Congress. — As early in the war as 1861, 
a number of resolutions were brought into Congress, designed to 
meet this difficulty,'^ and Mr. Lovejoy introduced a bill making it a 

1 Liberator, July 19, 1861 ; Appendix D, No. 68. 

2 Williams, History of Negro Race in America, 245 ; Appendix D, No. 69. 

3 Appendix C, Nos. 36, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48. 



§§ 93-95- 



Fugitives from Loyal Slave States. 79 

penal offence " for any officer or private of the army or navy to 
capture or return, or aid in the capture or return" of fugitive 
slaves.i The bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, 
which reported adversely upon it, April i6. 1862.2 December 16, 
1861, Mr. Hale had offered a resolution, which was adopted, looking 
toward a uniform method of dealing with the slaves of rebels.^ 
Mr. Sumner brought in another on December 17, which forbade the 
employment of the armies in the surrender of fugitives.* " I ask, 
sir," said the writer of a letter read by Mr. Sumnier, " shall our sons, 
who are offering their lives for the preservation of our institutions, 
be degraded to slave catchers for any persons loyal or disloyal? If 
such il the policy of the government, I shall urge my son to shed 
no more blood for its preservation." ^ Another protest came from 
two German companies in one of the Massachusetts regiments, who, 
when they enlisted, entered the service with the understanding that 
they should not be put to any such discreditable service. They 
complained, and with them the German population generally 
throughout the country." ^ 

Some proof that the owner of the slave was at least loyal to the 
government seemed necessary, if rendition were to be made at all ; 
though antislavery men were determined to admit no return of fugi- 
tives^under any circumstances. December 20, i86r, a resolution 
of Mr. Wilson's was adopted, for an additional article of war for- 
bidding officers from returning fugitives under any consideration.' 
A bill was introduced, discussed, and somewhat amended, but 

never passed.^ 

Mr. Blair'sbill.of February 25, 1862, from the Committee on Mili- 
tary Affairs in the House, was to the same purpose.^ This, however, 
was successfully carried in both houses, and signed by the Presi- 
dent, May 14, 1862. In the discussion, Mr. Mallory opposed the 
bill, because it seemed to him that it would prevent the President of 
the United States from sending a military force into a State to aid 
the authorities in enforcing a national law which stands upon the 
statute-book.!*^ Mr. Bingham answered this objection by saying 
that it simply determined that for the future, as in the past, the 

1 Appendix C, No. 35. '^ Appendix C, No. 66. 

3 Appendix C, No. 41. 

4 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., no; Appendix C, No. 42. 

6 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess , 130. ^ Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 130. 

1 Appendix C, No. 47- * Appendix C, No. 48. 

9 Appendix C, No. 58. ^° Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 955. 



8o Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. 

army and navy should not exercise functions which belong solely 
to the civil magistrates.^ 

§ 96. Arrests by civil officers. — The act of May 14, 1862, applied 
only to army officers. Notwithstanding the opportunities then 
offered for escape, wandering negroes were still liable to be seized 
by civil authorities and placed in jail. In this way numbers of 
negroes, many of them really free, were arrested, on the suppo- 
sition of being runaways, and were imprisoned without trial for an 
indefinite length of time. An advertisement in 1863 shows the 
method then in use. 

" There was committed to the jail of Warren County, Kentucky, as a run- 
away slave, on the 29th September, 1862, a negro man calling himself Jo Miner. 
He says he is free, but has nothing to show to establish the fact. He is 
about thirty-five years of age, very dark copper color, about five feet eight 
inches high, and will weigh about one hundred and fifty pounds. The 
owner can come forward, prove property, and pay charges, or he will be dealt 

with as the law requires. 

" R. J. PorrER, J. W. C. 
" March i6, 1S63. i m." 2 

§ 97. Denial of the use of the jails in the District of Columbia. — 

Several efforts were made to remedy this state of things, at least in 
the territory over which Congress had exclusive control. December 
4, 1 86 1, Mr. Wilson, who had been investigating the condition of the 
District of Columbia jail in Washington, offered a joint resolution 
for the release of all fugitives from service or labor therein hcld.^ 
It appeared that some sixty persons were imprisoned solely because 
they were suspected of being runaways, and had been allowed no 
opportunity to prove the contrary. A free boy from Pennsylvania 
came to Washington with the 5th Pennsylvania Regiment. He 
was found in the streets and sent to jail. Another boy, who was 
working for the soldiers on the railroad, was also taken up and 
placed therc.^ 

Mr. Wilson struck at the root of the matter by a resolution, which 
was agreed to, looking to the revision of all the laws in the District 
of Columbia providing for the arrest of persons as fugitives from 
service or labor, and to consider the expediency of abolishing 
slavery in the District.^ 

1 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 956. 

2 Liberator, May i, 1S63 Extract from Frankfort Commonwealth. 
8 Appendix C, No. 33. 

* Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 10. '" Appendix C, No. -^i. 



§§95-97] District of Columbia. 8l 

On December 9, 1861, Mr. Bingham introduced a resolution for 
the repeal of all acts in force in the District of Columbia which au- 
thorized the commitment of runaways and suspected runaways to 
the jail; it was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary,^ Mr. 
Fesscnden asked that the Committee on the District of Columbia 
investigate and report upon the condition of the jail; this was 
agreed to.^ 

A few weeks later, December 30, i86r, Mr. Grimes presented a 
bill in the Senate in regard to the administration of criminal justice 
in the District. This was read and referred to the committee, which 
reported it, January 6, 1862.^ Efforts were immediately made to 
prevent fugitive slaves from being included in the general jail deliv- 
ery contemplated by the bill. Mr. Powell, in the debate upon his 
amendment to that purpose, urged that so long as the institution 
of slavery existed in the South, no such measure ought to prevail* 
Mr. Grimes supported his measure by giving some examples of 
exceedingly unjust cases which had occurred. " A young colored 
fellow, who came as a servant of an officer from the vicinity of 
Pittsburg, was thrown into this jail in August last. The regiment to 
which he was attached went forward toward the face of the enemy. 
There was nobody here to look after him. There is no doubt as 
to his being a free boy, yet he was there on the first day of this 
month." To such cases he desired to have the law apply. " They 
have here in this District and in Maryland what they call an appre- 
hension fee. They have a law which declares that if any slave 
Wanders a certain distance from the residence of his master, he may 
be taken up as a fugitive. There are persons in this vicinity, I am 
credibly informed, who are lying in wait all around your city and 
the surrounding country, in hope that they can find some poor 
colored man or woman who is out picking berries and visiting a 
friend, and who will wander a little further than the distance estab- 
lished by law from the residence of the master." ^ The opinion 
that such injustice ought to be corrected prevailed, and the amend- 
ment was rejected. After much discussion the bill passed the 
Senate, January 14, 1862,^ and it was approved by the President on 
the same day. Thenceforward the Fugitive Slave Law was prac- 
tically a dead letter at the seat of government, since the necessary 

1 Appendix C, No. 39. - Appendix C, No. 38. 

3 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1S2 ; Appendix C, No 51. 
* Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 313. 

^ Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 264. ^ Appendix C, No 51. 

6 



82 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. 

machinery was lacking, and the spirit of the administration was 
opposed to it. The new act was in effect a national personal 
liberty bill. 

§ 98. Abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. — The work 
contemplated by all the propositions was finally accomplished in 
one act. On December 16, 1861, Mr. Wilson had offered a bill 
in the Senate for the total abolition of slavery in the District of 
Columbia. It was reported with amendments a few weeks after 
the passage of the act denying the use of jails, and on February 
2\f 1862, Mr. Wilson presented a supplementary bill.^ 

The debates upon this proposition were long and interesting. 
The South regarded it as " an entering wedge of something 
more comprehensive and radical,""'^ as preparatory to the abolition 
of slavery in the whole country by Congress. The antislavery 
party rejoiced that at last an opportunity had come for freeing 
the national capital from the disgrace of slavery. The bill passed 
both houses, and was approved April 16, 1862.^ By the final 
section of the act the black code of Maryland was wiped out, 
and the severe local provisions against fugitives, which had not 
been repealed by the previous act, were at last taken away. It 
remained only to attack the last stronghold of the system, — the 
two acts of 1793 and 1850. 

§ 99. Regulations against kidnapping. In the act of April 16, 
1862, were included regulations against kidnapping, — a practice 
made easy by the unsettled state of the country. It seems to 
have been largely carried on not only by Southerners, but also 
by unprincipled soldiers connected with the Union army. The 
Liberator of March 27, 1863, notices such a case. Some men 
from the 99th Regiment of New York Volunteers kidnapped a 
free colored man at Norfolk, Virginia. They took his horse, cart, 
and the provisions which he had just bought, and offered him 
for sale to be sent South. During the absence of his captors for 
a few moments, the man was able to work off his bonds and to 
escape in the darkness. He immediately went before a provost 
marshal, told his story, and recognized one of his captors who 
was just entering the door. What the consequences of this meet- 
ing were the " Liberator " does not tell us ; but the impression is 
given that the negro was saved from his pursuers.^ 

1 Appendix C, Nos. 42, 54, 56. 

2 Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, iii. 273. 

8 Appendix C, Nos. 62, 65. * Appendix D, No. 68. 



§§97-101.] Repeal of the Acts proposed. 83 

§ 100. Eepeal of the Fugitive Slave Acts. — By the successive acts of 
Congress and the President, the legal effect of the Fugitive Slave 
Laws was now confined practically to the limited area of the Border 
States. No officer, civil" or military, could return a fugitive into 
the Confederate lines. Slavery was forbidden in the District of 
Columbia, and there could be no escapes thence ; and Congress 
forbade the use of the jails of the District for the confinement 
of fugitives from slaveholding regions. In the free States the 
rendition of slaves, though still legally required, had long since 
ceased. The final step was delayed till 1864. 

§ 10 1 . Early propositions to repeal the acts. — Repeal, however, 
was preceded by many earlier propositions. The Committee on 
the Judiciary, to which was referred Mr. Howe's bill, presented 
December 26, 1861,^ did not report until 1863, and then with the 
opinion that it ought not to pass. In introducing his repeal 
measure, Mr. Howe spoke of the bill of 1850 as one "which has 
probably done as much mischief as any other one act that was 
ever passed by the national legislature. It has embittered against 
each other twD great sections of the country."^ To take away 
the. law of 1850 would leave in force the act of 1793, which 
was " good enough." 

June 9, 1862, soon after the passage of the acts on the District 
of Columbia, Mr. Julian presented in the House another repeal 
bill, which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.'^ As 
the war progressed, and the antislavery sentiment began to out- 
weigh all others, it became evident that the old law could not 
much longer obtain. Nevertheless the question was set aside 
during the session of 1862-63, but in 1863-64 five bills were 
introduced looking to the repeal of the acts.* 

Mr. Morris, from the committee to whom all bills for repeal 
had been referred, reported a substitute for them, June 6, 1864, 
and this was the basis of the final action of Congress.^ 

1 Appendi.x C, No. 49. 2 Cong. Glolje, 37 Cong, i Sess., 1356. 

3 Appendix C, No. 76. 

* Three bills were introduced in the House on the same day, December 14, 1S63, by 
Messrs. Stevens, Julian, and Ashley. They were read twice and referred. Appendix 
C, Nos. 104, 106. Before the final consideration of the subject, on February 8, 1864, 
two more bills were introduced in Congress, Mr. Sumner's in the Senate, and Mr. 
Spalding's in the House. The former went to the Committee on the Judiciary, the 
latter to the Select Committee on Slavery and Freedom. Appendix C, No. 80. 

* Appendix C, No. So. 



84 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. 

§ 102. Discussion of the repeal bill in the House. — Had the country 
been divided simply into two parts, the slaveholding Southern Con- 
federacy and the free loyal North, little discussion could have arisen. 
The third element, the slaveholding States which remained firm 
for the Union, rendered the question far more complex. The 
bill therefore aroused much indignation. Mr. Mallory demanded, 
as an act of justice to his State, that " the Fugitive Slave Act be 
permitted to remain on the statute-book. If you say it will be a 
dead letter, so much less excuse have you for repealing it, and so 
much more certainly is the insult and wrong to Kentucky gra- 
tuitous. This act, by which you declare your intention not to 
obey the injunction of the Constitution is wanton and useless, 
except for the purpose of bravely exhibiting your contempt for 
that instrument." "The framers of the Constitution gave us the 
right to reclaim fugitive slaves. It was conceded not as a favor, 
but as a right." " Kentucky has remained true to her faith 
pledged to the government, and I warn you not to persevere in 
inflicting on her insult and outrage."^ 

Again, one of the reasons for the departure of the Southern States, 
v^as the "bad faith of the Northern States, — the fatal infringe- 
ment of this part of the Constitution. It was because of Personal 
Liberty bills, John Brown raids, and general denunciation and in- 
termeddling with slavery." ^ Many members urged that there could 
be no more reckless action than to show to the Border States an 
apparent disregard of the Constitution. Mr. Cox considered the 
law .the only refuge left to a certain class of citizens to protect 
their '• rights." It would be like saying to them, We place the 
penalty of the treason of the revolted slaveholders on your 
innoceijt heads. " We add to your calamities the ingratitude and 
treachery of the government to which you have adhered."^ 

The final discussion, June 13, opened with a long speech by 
Mr. King. The old arguments from the Constitution, the far- 
seeing wisdom of the fathers, the opinion of the Supreme Court 
in the Prigg case, and the harm done the Border States, were 
again rehearsed.* 

In answer to Mr. King, Mr. Hubbard denied that the Constitu- 
tion provided for the enactment of a law by Congress, and in any 

1 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2774, 2775. 

2 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2914. 
8 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2914. 
4 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 291 1. 



§§ I02- 103.1 Discussion of Repeal Bills. 85 

case the treason of slavery had already absolved the people from 
any such obligation. It surely must be competent for this Congress 
to repeal any act which a previous Congress had enacted. For 
yet another reason the law should be repealed. Negro soldiers 
must be enhsted : " You cannot draft black men into the field, 
while your marshals are chasing women and children in the woods 
of Ohio with a view to render them back into bondage. The 
moral sense of the nation, ay, of the world, would revolt at it." ^ 
Again, this would make a conflict in our laws, said Mr. Morris. 
A^colored man might enlist in our army, then, under the Fugitive 
Slave Law, "he might be seized and remanded to slavery; and as 
a further consequence, dealt with as a deserter from his post of 
duty." 2 It was also urged that unless slavery was to survive the 
war, the two acts were useless and obsolete statutes, which ought to 
be wiped out of existence. No one who believes that slavery is 
dead would desire to keep such a guaranty of the institution.^ 
Mr. Hubbard then demanded the yeas and nays on the passage 
of the bill. It was declared in the affirmative, yeas 82, nays 57, 
and thus the repeal was successfully carried in the House.* 

§ 103. Repeal biUs in the Senate. — Mr. Sumner had already re- 
ported a repeal bill from the Committee on Slavery and Freedom 
in the Senate, February 29, 1864.' The progress of the bill was so 
delayed by the opposition, that Mr. Sumner at last gave notice that 
he should take every proper occasion to call up the bill, and press 
its consideration.*^ 

In the debate several speeches were made against the measure, 
while Mr. Sumner defended it. To the antislavery party the act 
was constitutionally 7 and morally wrong, so against public senti- 
ment that it could seldom be enforced, and the question of its repeal 
was as plain as a "diagram," "the multiplication table," or "the 
ten commandments."^ They desired to strike slavery wherever 
they could hit it, and to " purify the statute-book, so that there 
should be nothing in it out of which this wrong can derive any 
support." It should be repealed for the sake of our cause in foreign 
lands.9 « Since the outbreak of the Rebellion this statute has been 

1 Con-. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2913. 2 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2919. 
3 Con° Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2917. * Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2920. 

5 Senate Journal, 38 Cong, i Sess., 196; Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess.. 869; Ap- 

pendix C, No. So. , „ ^ o 

6 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., iiyS- '' Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Se.ss , 1710. 
8 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 1709. ^ Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 1713. 



86 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. 

constantly adduced by our enemies abroad as showing that we are 
Httle better than Jefferson Davis and his slave-monger crew; for 
slavery never shows itself worse than in the -slave-hunter. It is a 
burden for our cause which it ought not to be obliged to bear," 

To retain the law of 1793, framed by the founders of the Re- 
public, and repeal the act of 1850 with its manifest injustice, was 
suggested as a desirable compromise. Mr. Sherman, therefore, 
offered an amendment to this effect, and it was accepted.^ The 
friends of the measure then felt that the bill as it stood was of 
little value to the antislavery cause. Mr. Brown maintained that it 
was really a proposition to reinstate slavery in its fastness in the 
Constitution. " The civilized world, when it beholds the spectacle 
of the American Senate going back for three quarters of a cen- 
tury to resurrect a statute of slave-catching, and pass it anew with 
their indorsement, will credit very little all your talk about free- 
dom. The act will give the lie to all argument." ^ 

Before further action w^as taken on Mr. Sherman's bill, the repeal 
bill from the House came before the Senate, and was reported from 
the committee, June 15, 1864. It was discussed for several days, 
but no new arguments were offered, and, June 23, 1864, the bill 
passed the Senate by a vote of 27 to 12.^ On the 25th of June it 
received President Lincoln's signature, and the Fugitive Slave Laws 
were swept from the statute-book of the United States.^ 

§ 104. The repeal act and the thirteenth amendment. — The act was 
a simple one; it runs as follows: — 

"Chap. CLXVI. An Act to repeal the Fugitive Slave Act of 
eighteen hundred and fifty, and all Acts and parts of Acts for the 
rendition of Fugitive Slaves. 

" Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled. That sections three 
and four of an act entitled ' An act respecting fugitives from justice, 
and persons escaping from the service of their masters,' passed 
February twelve, seventeen hundred and ninety-three, and an act 
entitled ' An act to amend, and supplementary to, the act entitled 
An act respecting fugitives from justice, and persons escaping 
from the service of their masters, passed February twelve, seven. 

1 Senate Journal, 38 Cong, i Sess., 348; Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 1710, 1714. 

- Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 1752. 

3 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 3191 ; Appendi.x C, No. 83. 

* Appendix C, No. 116. 



§§ 103-105] Repeal of the Acts. 87 

teen hundred and ninety-three,' passed September, eighteen hun- 
dred and fifty, be and the same are hereby repealed. 
"Approved, June 28, 1864." 

The whole structure of statutes, decisions, and judicial machinery 
which had been erected to compel by national authority the people 
of free States to share in the responsibility for slavery, was at last 
overthrown. But the constitutional obligation remained ; so long 
as a slave anywhere existed, the neighboring States were bound to 
pursue him, if he ran away, and might by statute provide for his 
return. The final step was therefore to complete the work of legal 
emancipation by the thirteenth amendment to the Constitution. On 
January 31, 1865, Congress voted to submit the following article to 
the States for their approval and ratification: " Art. XIII. Neither 
slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, 
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within 
the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction." On 
December 18, 1865, the Secretary of State proclaimed that the 
amendment had been approved by twenty-seven of the thirty-six 
States, and was consequently adopted. 

§ 105. Educating effect of the controversy. — The first act of 1793 
was imperfect. It did not provide a national machinery whereby 
its provisions could be executed, and many of the States by means 
of the personal liberty laws refused to lend their officers and jails 
for the work. All eff'orts to amend the law were unsuccessful until 
the great compromise of 1850 gave opportunity to pass a second 
act. 

This new measure remedied certain defects in the first statute, 
and was therefore more satisfactory to the slave-owners. As soon 
as it began to be executed, however, its provisions were found to be 
so severe that the trials and rescues it occasioned served only to 
educate the people to the evils of slavery by bringing its efi"ects 
close to them. Thus, far from compelling the North to acquiesce 
in the system, it greatly increased the number of Abolitionists 
The arraying of the North and South against each other in the 
Civil War intensified public sentiment upon the question, and led 
more and more to a loose execution of the law. It was found im- 
practicable to return slaves to disloyal masters, and a law to prevent 
any such return was the next step toward the doing away of the 
whole system. Next came the question of the duty and power of 
the general government, within its exclusive jurisdiction: in 1862 



8S Fugitive Slaves : — Question)^ Ended. [Ch. vi. 

all responsibility was disavowed. By this time the force of the law 
extended only to the loyal slave States, and the force of public 
opinion in 1864 withdrew the last statutory safeguard of slavery 
under the Constitution, A change in the text of the Constitution 
finally took away the force of the clause on which the return of 
fugitives was based. 

We can see, at this distance, how clearly slavery was doomed to 
destruction, from the time the two sections first made it an issue in 
1820; but there was no relation arising out of slavery except the 
territorial question which did so much as the fugitive slave contro- 
versy to hasten the downfall of the system. The contrast between 
the free principles of democratic government and human bondage 
was forced upon the attention of the North by the pursuit of fugi- 
tives in their midst. Yet without national machinery for the re- 
capture of runaways the institution could not have long been 
maintained. There is no evidence that the North was profoundly 
stirred by the horrors of slavery before 1850; it was only when the 
North was called upon, in the Territories, and through the Fugi- 
tive Slave Law, to give positive aid to the system that the anti- 
slavery movement grew strong. Fugitive slaves and fugitive slave 
laws helped to destroy slavery. 



APPENDIX A. 

COLONIAL LAWS RELATIVE TO FUGITIVES. 



The precise text is quoted in eacli case. Tlie figures in braclcets [] refer to para- 
graphs in the text. l"he sign O indicates that the full text is to be found iu the 
reference cited. 

1. New Netherlands : — Running away from Patroons. [§ 2]. 

1629, June 7. Freedoms and exemptions. Granted by the West India Company to 
all Patroons, Masters or Private Persons who will plant Colonies in New Netherlands. — 
" XVIII. The Company promise the colonists of the Patroons. . . . XIX. — And any 
Colonist who shall leave the service of his Patroon and enter into the service of another, 
or shall, contrary to his contract, leave his service, we promise to do everything in our 
power to apprehend and deliver the same into the hands of his Patroon or attorney, 
that he may be proceeded against according to the customs of this country, as occasion 
may require." — O Lazvs and Ordinances of Neiv Netherlands, 7. 

2. Massachusetts : — Capture and protection of servants. [§ 4.] 
1630-1641. " Acts respecting Masters, Servants, and Labourers." — " Sec. 3. It is 

also ordered, that when any servants shall run from their masters, or any other inhab- 
itants shall privily go away with suspicion of evil intentions, it shall be lawful for the 
next magistrate, or the constable and two of the chief inhabitants where no magistrate 
is, to pre°ss men and boats or pinnaces at the publick charge, to pursue such persons by 

sea and land, and bring them back by force of arms Sec. 6. It is ordered, and by 

this court declared; that if any servant shall flee from the tyranny and cruelty of his or 
her master to the house of any freeman of the same town, they shall be there protected 
and sustained till due order be taken for their relief; provided due notice thereof be 
speedily given to their master from whom they fled, aijd to the next magistrate or con- 
stable where the party so fled is harboured." — O Charters and General Laivs of the 
Colony and Proz'ince of Massac /lusetts Bay, 155. 

3 New Netherlands : — Runaway servants. [§ 6] 

1640, Aug. 7. " Ordinance of the Director and Council of New Netherland, against 
Fugitives from Service, and providing for the proper drawing up of Legal Instruments." 
Passed 9 August, 1640. " Whereas many Servants daily run away from their masters, 
whereby the latter are put to great inconvenience and expense ; the Corn and Tobacco 
rot in the field and the whole Harvest is at a stand still, which tends to the serious in- 
jury of this country, to their Masters' ruin, and to bring the magistracy into contempt. 
We, therefore, command all farm and house Servants faithfully to serve out their 
time with their Masters according to their contracts and in no manner to run away, 
and if they have any thing against their masters, to come to Us and make application 
to be heard in due form of Law, on pain of being punished and of making good all 
losses and damages of their Masters and serving double the time they may lose. . . . 

[89] 



90 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laws. [App. a. 

We do, also, forbid all inhabitants of New Netlierland to harbor or feed any of these 
fugitive Servants under the penalty of Fifty guilders, for the benefit of the Informer ; ^ 
for the new Church and y^ for the Fiscal." Dated as above. — O Laws and Oidinances 
oj A'lIO A'etherliDuls, 32. 

4. Maryland : — Runaway apprentices felons. 

1642, March 26. Act against Fugitives. — " It shall be felony in any apprentice Ser- 
vant to depart away secretly from his or her Master or dame then being with intent to 
convey him or her Selfe away out of the Province. And on any other person that shall 
wittingly accompany such Servant in such unlawfull departure as aforesaid. And the 
offendors therein shall suffer paines of death, and after his due debts paid shall forfeit 
all his Lands, goods, & Chattels within the Province. Provided, that in Case his Lord- 
ship or his Leivt't-Generall shall at the request of the partie so condemned exchange 
such pains of death into Servitude, that then such exchange shall not exceed the term 
of Seaven years, and that the Master or dame of the parties so pardoned of death shall 
first be satisfied for the terme of such parties Service unexpired from the day of such 
unlawfull departure, and for double the time of his absence dureing his said departure." 
— O Archive's of Maryland, Assembly Proceedings, 124. 

5. New Netherlands : — Against harboring fugitive servants. (§6). 

1642, April 13. " We have interdicted and forbidden, as we do hereby most, ex- 
pressly interdict and forbid, all our good inhabitants here, from this time henceforward, 
lodging any strangers in their houses, or furnishing them more than one meal and har- 
boring them more than one night without first notifying the Director," etc. — O Laws 
and Ordinances 0/ New A'etherlands, 32. 

6. Virginia : — Entertainment of fugitives. [§ 3 ] 

1642-3, March. Act XXI. " Whereas complaints are at every quarter court exhibited 
against divers persons who entertain and enter into covenants with runaway servants 
and freemen who have formerly hired themselves to others, to the great prejudice if not 
the utter undoeing of divers poor men, thereby also encouraging servants to runn from 
their masters and obscure themselves in some remote plantation. Upon consideration 
had for the future preventing of the like injurious and unjust dealings. Be it enacted and 
confirmed that what person or persons soever shall entertain any person as hireling, or 
sharer, or upon any other conditions for one whole yeare, without certificate from the 
commander or any one commissioner of the place, that he or she is free from any ingage- 
ment of service. The person so hireing without such certificate as aforesaid, shall for 
every night that he or she entertaineth any servant, either as hireling or otherwise, ffor- 
feit to the master or mistris of the said servant twenty pounds of tobacco. And for 
evrie freeman which he or she entertaineth (formerly hired by another) for a year as 
aforesaid, he or she shall forfeit to the party who had first hired him twenty pound of 
tobacco for every night deteyned. And for every freeman which he or she entertaineth 
(though he hath not formerly hired himselfe to another), without certificate as aforesaid, 
And in all these cases the party hired shall receive such censure and punishment as 
shall be thought fitt by the Governor and Counsell : All ways provided that if any such 
runnaway servants or hired freemen shall produce such a certificate, wherein it appears 
that they are freed from their former masters service, or from any such ingagement 
respectively, if afterwards it shall be proved that the said certificates are counterfeit 
then the retayner not to suffer according to the penalty of this act. But such punish- 
ment shall be inflicted upon the forger and procurer thereof as the Governor and 
Council shall think fitt." — O Statutes at Lary^e. Hening, Laws of Virginia, I. 253. 

7. Virginia: — Runaway servants. [§3.] 

1642-3, March. Act XXII. "Be it therefore enacted and confirmed that all runa- 
ways that shall absent themselves from their said master's service shall be lyable to 



1642-165I] Colonial Laiis relative to Fugitives. 91 

make satisfaction by service at the end of their tymes by indenture (vizt.) double the 
tyme of service soe neglected, and in some cases more if the commissioners for the 
place appointed shall find it requisite and convenient. And if such runaways shall be 
found to transgresse the second time or oftener (if it shall be duely proved against them), 
that then they shall be branded in the cheek with the letter R. and passe under the 
statute of incorrigible rogues." - O Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virgaua\2SA. 

8 New England Confederation: -Articles of Confederation. [§ b.J 
1643 Aug. 29. VIII. " It is also agreed that if any servant runn away from his 

master'into any other of the.se confederated Jurisdiccons, That in such Case, vpon the 
Certyficate of one Magistrate in the Jurisdiccon out of which the said servant fled, 
or upon other due proofe, the said servant shalbe deliuered either to his Master or 
any other that pursues and brings such Certificate or ^.o^it:' -O Plymouth Colony 
Records, IX. 5. 

9 Connecticut : — Servants and apprentices. 

1644, June 3. " Whereas many stubborn, refrectary and discontented searuants and 
app^ntices w^'' drawe themselves fro their masters searuices, to improue their tyme to 
their owne aduantage ; for the p^euenting whereof, It is Ordered, that whatsoeuer 
searuant or apprentice shall heareafter offend in that kynd, before their couenants or 
terme of searuice are expiered, shall searue their said Masters, as they shall be appre- 
hended or retayned the treble terme, or threefold tyme of their absense in such kynd." 
— O Connecticut Records, I. 105. 

10. New Netherlands : — Entertainment of runaways. 

1648, Oct. 6. Ordinance of the Director and Council of New Netherland against 
Fugitives from Service. Passed 6 October, 1648. — " The Director General and Council 
her'^eby notify and warn all persons against harboring or entertaining any one bound 
to service either to the Company or to any private individual here or elsewhere, and 
against lodging or boarding them at most longer than twenty-four hours, and if any 
one shall be found to have acted contrary hereto, he shall forfeit a fine of fl. 150, to be 
paid to whomsoever will make the complaint and it may appertain." — O Laws and 
Ordinances of Ne7v Netherlands, 104. 

11. Maryland ; — Against fugitives. 

1649. Archives of Maryland, Assembly Proceedings, 249. 

12. Maryland : — Against fugitives. 

1654, Oct. Archives of Maryland, Assembly Proceedings, 348. 

13. Virginia : — Penalty for second offence. 

1655-6, March. " Act XI. Be it enacted by this Grand Assembly that if any runn- 
away servant offend the second time against the act in March, 1642, concerning runn- 
away servants, that he shall not onely be branded with the letter R., and passe under 
the statute for an incorrigible rogue, but also double his time of service so neglected, 
and soe likewise double the time that any time afterward he shall neglect, and in some 
cases more if the Commissioners think fitt : And be it further enacted by the authority 
aforesaid, that he or she that shall lodge or harbour any such runnaway shall not only 
pay 20 lb. of tobacco per night, but also 40 lb. of tobacco per day so long as they shallbe 
proved to entertaine them, contrary to an act of assembly in March, 1642." — O Statutes 
at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, I. 401. 

14. New Netherlands : — Treaty with United Colonies. [§ii.] 
1656. Resolution of the States General ratifying the treaty of Hartford, passed Febru- 
ary 22, 1656. — " Respecting Fugitives. It is agreed that the same method shall be ob- 
served between the United English Colonies and the Dutch nation in this country of 
New Netherland, agreeablv to the eighth Article of the confederation between the 
United English Colonies in that case provided."-© Lazvs and Ordinances of New 
Netherlands, 2 16. 



92 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laws. [App. A. 

15. City of Amsterdam : — Runa-way colonists banished. 

1656, December. Articles and Ordinances revised and enacted by the Right Honor- 
able the Lords Burgomasters of the City of Amsterdam, according to which shall be 
engaged and sworn all those who shall hereafter enter the service of the Lord's Burgo- 
masters of the City of Amsterdam, for the purpose of going with their own, or chartered 
ships to New Netherlands and the limits of the West India Company's Grant, etc. 
Passed December, 1856 — "Whoever runs off to the French, English, or any other 
Christian or Indian neighbors by whatsoever name they may be called, shall, in addition 
to the forfeiture of all his monthly pay to the City, be banished forever from New Nether- 
land as a perjured villain, and if he afterward come to fall into the hands of the City, he 
shall, without any consideration, be punished by death or otherwise, according to the 
exigency of the case." — O Laws ami Oydhia)ices of New N^etlierlands, 273. 

16. Virginia : — Entertainment of runawrays. 

1657-8, March. Act XV. Concerning Hireing Servants. Thirty pounds of to- 
bacco shall be paid for every night a servant or person without a certificate is enter- 
tained. — Statutes at Lat-ge. Heniiig, Laws of Virginia, I. 439. 

17. Virginia : — Punishment of runaways. 

1657-8, March. Act XVI. Against Runnaway Servants. Runnaways shall double 
the time of service absent at the end of their time of indenture. For the second offence 
they shall be branded with the letter R. and double the time lost. — Lleiiing, Laws of 
Virginia, I. 440. 

18. Virginia : — Huie and crie after runaways. 

1657-8, March. "ActCXIII. Concerning Huie and cries. Whereas buy and cries 
after runnaway servants hath been much neglected to the greate damage and loss of the 
inhabitants of this colloney. Bee it therefore enacted and confirmed by the authorite of 
this present Grand Asseynbly, that all such huy and cries shall be signed either by the 
Governor or some of the Councill, or under the hand of some com'r, nameing the 
county where the said com'r lives, and the saine shall be conveyed from house to 
house with all convenient speed according as the direction thereof expresseth: And 
every com'r of each county unto whose house by this meanes the said huy and crie 
shall come shall then date and subscribe the same. And the master of every house that 
shall make default in the speedy conveyance of any such huies and cries shall for every 
such default forfeit and pay unto the owners of any such runnawaie as the said hues and 
cries shall mention, one hundred pounds of tobacco, and where the said runnawaie ser- 
vant is found he shall be apprehended and sent from constable to constable untill such 
runnawaie or runnawayes shall be delivered to his or theire master or mistresse, and if 
any neglect can be proved against the constable hee to be fined three hundred and 
fiftie pounds of tobacco." — O Statutes at La7ge. Hening, Lazvs of Virginia, I. 483. 

19. Nev^r Netherlands : — Runa^way servants 

1658, April 9. Ordinance of the Director General and Council of New Netherland 
renewing sundery Ordinances therein mentioned. Passed 9 April, 165S. — " I3thly, not 
to debauch or incite any person's servants, male or female, or to harbor them, or fugi- 
tives and strangers, longer than 24 hours without notifying the Fiscal, Magistrates, or 
Schouts, and all servant men and women remaine bound to fulfill and complete their 
contracts, on pain of arbitrary correction, according to the Ordinance of the 6 October, 
164S." — O Laws of Ncrv Netherlands, 344. 
20 Virginia : — How to know a runnaway servant. [§ 3.] 
1658-9, March. Act III. " Lt is enaeted a//d ordt/ined thiit the master of everie such 
runaway shall cutt, or cause to be cutt, the hair of all such runnawayes close above their 
ears, whereby they may be with more ease discovered and apprehended." — O Statutes 
at Large. Hening, Lazvs of Virginia, I. 517. 



I656-I663.] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. , 93 

91 Vireinia — Payment of Dutch shipmasters. 

16,0-60 March. Act XV. An Act for the Pay of Dutch Masters br.ng.ng in kunn- 
away Serv'ants. Whenever a master shall refuse to pay the cost of returmng a runn- 
away from the Dutch, the payment shall be made by the secretary at h.s office. - 
Statutes at Large. Hcning, Lazus of Virginia, I. 539- ^ 

22 Virginia : — Apprehension of runaways. 

?66oI, March. A^t X. Apprehending of Runnawayes. -" Whereas the pursu. 
and takeing of runnaways is hindered chiefly by the neglect of constables m making 
search according to their warrants, Bee Ht enacted that every constable shal make 
diligent search and inquiry through his precincts, and what constable soever sha 1 upon 
s arch apprehend suci runaways shall receive from the master of the servant or In 
encouragement two hundred pounds of tobaccoe, and if any constable shall neglect he 
Ihall be fined three hundred and fifty pounds of tobaccoe and caske according to 
former act."-0 Statutes at Large. Henuig, Laivs of Virgima II. 21. 

23 Virginia : — English runnaway with negroes. [^ 3.J 

1660-1 March. Act XIII. " ^.r /// .;...W that in case any English servant shall 
runaway 'in company with any negroes who are incapable of making satisfaction by 
addition of time, Bee itt enacted that the English so running away in company with tl^m 
shall serve for the time of the said negroes absence as they are to do for their owne 
by a former act " — O Hcning, Laws of Virginia, II. 26. 

24 Virginia • - Glocester to have jurisdiction over runaways. 

1660-1 March. It was ordered that the county of Glocester have the power to 
make such laws for the recovering of runaways as shall be found necessary and con- 
venient. — Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, 1 1 . 35. 

25 Virginia: —Runaway servants. 

1661-2 March. Act CII. Runaways. — Penalties for running away are the same 
as in former acts. English servants if running away with negroes, and the negroes die 
or be lost shall pay either four thousand five hundred pounds of tobacco and caske, 
or four vears service for every negro so lost or dead. - Hening, Laws of Virgrma, II. 1 17- 
26. Maryland • — Against runaways. 
1662. Maryland Archives, Assembly Proceedings, 451. 
27 Virginia : — Pursuit of runaways to the Dutch. 
'1663 September. Act VIII. " An Act concerning the pursuit of runawayes." It 
is enacted that runaways are to be pursued at the public expense, and, if they have 
escaped to the Dutch, letters are to be written to the Governors of those Plantations 
to return the runaways. Expenses are to be paid according to the provisions of a 
former act. — Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, II. 187. 
28. Maryland : — Against English servants. 
1663 October. Maryhvid Archives, Assembly Proceedings, A^9- 
29 New Netherlands : - Quakers, etc. refused admission to colony. 
1663 May 17. Ordinance of the Director General and Council of New Netherland 
prohibiting the bringing of Quakers and other Strollers into New Netherland^ Passed 
17 May 1663. -"The Director General and Council, therefore, do hereby Order and 
command all Skippers, Sloop captains and others, whomsoever they may be, not to 
convey or bring, much less to land within this government, any such Vagabonds Quak- 
ers and other Fugitives, whether Men or Women, until they have first addressed them- 
selves to the government, etc on the pain of the Importers forfeiting a fine of 

Twenty pounds Flemish for every person," etc. - O Laws and Ordinances of Aew 

A'cthcrlands, 439. 

30 Virginia: — Entertainment of runaways. 

1666 October. Act IX. " An act against entertayners of runaways." Penalty for 
entertaining runaways increased to sixty pounds of tobacco for every day and mght 
he or they shall be harbored. - Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, II. 239. 



94 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laws. \\.vv. a. 

31. Maryland : — Runaw^ays and their entertainers. 

1666, May. " An Act providing ag' Runaways, and all such as shall Entertayn them. 
Whereas there was an act providing against Runnawaies made in the year 1650, and 
another act made in the year 1662, both which acts being adjudged insufficient Satisfaccon 
for the reparac5n of their respective Masters, mrssrse, Dame, or overseers damages 
sustained by their servt running from them, Be it enacted by the right honorble, the 
Lord Prop^y, by and with the consent of the upper and Lower House of this present 
general assembly, that from and after the publicacon hereof any Servant or Servants 
whatsoever unlawfully absenting themselves from their said Master, Mistress, Dame, or 
overseer, shall serve for every day 10. And be it further enacted by the Authority 
aforesaid that any Master, Mistress, dame, or Overseer that shall entertain any servant 
unlawfully absenting himselve as aforesaid, having been forewarned by the Master, mis- 
tress, Dame, or Overseer of the said servant, shall be fined for the first night five hun- 
dred pounds of Casked tobacco, for the second one thousand pounds of casked tobacco, 
for every other night fifteen hundred pounds of casked tobacco, the one half to the Lord 
Proprietor, the other to the informer, or them that shall sue for the same within any 
Court of Record within this province, to be Recovered by action of debt, plaint or In- 
formacon wherein no Essoyne, protection or wager of Lawe to be allowed, Provided 
that this Act nor anything therein conteynd shall not be adjudged to the predudice of 
any person or persons that shall apprehend any Runaway servants who are hereby 
required to use the best endeavors to Convey them to their owners or next justice of 
the peace to be conveyed from constable to constable until they be delivered to their 
said owners, if then living within this province. This act to continue for 3 years, or to 
the end of the next general assembly which shall first come." — O MaryLind Archives, 
Asscmi'lv Proccediiis^'s, 147. 

32. New Jersey . — Fugitive servants. 

1668, May 30. Acts passed and assented unto by the Governor, Council, and 
Burgess of the General Assembly of the Province of New-Caesarea, or New Jersey, 
the 30th Day of May, Anno Domini 1668. " Concerning Fugitives, It is Enacted by the 
same Authority, that every Apprentice and Servant that shall depart and absent them- 
selves from their Master and Dames, without leave first obtained, shall be judged by 
the Court to double the Time of such their Absence, by future Service over and above 
other Damages and costs which Master and Dame shall sustain by such unlawful 
Departure. 

" And it is also enacted, that whosoever shall be proved to have transported, or to have 
contrived the Transportation of any such Apprentice or Servant shall be fined Fm- 
PoHitds, and all such Damages as the Court shall Judge, and that the Master or Dame 
can make appear, and if not able, to be left to the Judgement of the Court." — O Xeiv 
Jersey Laws, S2. 

33. Virginia : — Runaways. 

i658, September. Act IV. About Runawayes. Moderate corporal punishment in- 
flicted by the master or magistrate shall not deprive the master of the satisfaction 
allowed by the law. — Statutes at Lar^e. Henhig, Laws of Virginia, W. 266. 

34. Virginia : — Runaways. 

1669, October. Act VIIL Against Runawayes. "Be it therefore enacted that 
whosoever apprehends any runaways, whether servant by indenture, custome or cove- 
nant, not haveing a legall passe, by those in every county that shall be appointed to give 
passes, or a note from his master, shall have a thousand pounds of tobacco allowed him 
by the publique, which tobacco shall be repaid by the service of the servant to the 
country when free from his master, and by the hired ffreeman immediately after ex- 
piration of his covenant to the man that apprehend.-?." 

"And be it further enacted that he that takes up such runaway is hereby enjoyned 



i666-i6S2.] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 95 

ffirst to carry him before the next justice who is to take cognizance of his good service, 
and to certify it in the next assembly, and then to dehver him to the constable of the 
parish where that justice dwells, who is to convey him to the next constable, till he be 
retorned to his master, and that each constable upon receipt of such runaway give his 
receipt, and if escape be made from any constable, the delinquent constable to pay one 
thousand pounds of tobacco ; and for the reimburseing the publique with the tobacco 
disbursed to the taker up." — O StaUites at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, II. 273. 

35. Virginia : — Apprehension of Runaways. 

1670, October. Act I. An Act concerning runaways. Reward for apprehending 
runaways is reduced to two hundred pounds of tobacco. Servants are to serve four 
months for every two hundred pounds of tobacco. Masters who fail to cut their 
servants' hair after twice running away shall be fined two hundred pounds of tobacco. 
Every constable through whose hands a runaway passes is to whip the servant severely. 
Constables allowing runaways to escape shall pay four hundred pounds of tobacco. 
Masters must not allow their servants to go free until the time of service has been 
worked out. — Statutes at Large. Hcuiiig, Laws of Virginia, II. 277. 

36. Virginia : — Reward to the first taker up of runaways. 

1670, October. Act XIII. Runawayes. Only the first taker up of a runaway shall 
be rewarded. — Statutes at Large. Heuing, Laws of Virginia, II. 2S3. 

37. Virginia: — Apprehension of Runaways. [§ 8.] 

1672, October. Act VIII. An Act for the apprehension and suppression of runa- 
wayes, negroes and sla^'es. Runaways resisting may be killed or wounded, and if they 
die from the effects of a wound the public shall pay the owner, but the person inflicting 
the injury is not to be questioned. Indians shall be rewarded by twenty armes length 
of Roanoake or the value thereof in goods for the apprehension of a runaway. Act is 
to continue in force only until the next assembly. — Statutes at Large. LLening, Laws 
of Virginia, II. 299. 

38. Maryland : — Apprehension of runaways. 

1671, April. The three acts of 1650, 1662, and 1666 have not proved sufficient en- 
couragement to people to apprehend runaways, therefore a statute against runaways 
and such persons that shall give them entertainment and others that shall travel without 
passes is enacted. — Maryia)id Archives, Assembly Proceedings, 298. 

39. Ne-wr Jersey : — Fugitive servants and apprentices. 

1675, November. "XXXIII. Concerning Fugitives, It is enacted by the same Au- 
thority, that every Apprentice and Servant that shall depart and absent themselves 
from their Masters or Dames, without leave first obtaind, shall be judged by the court 
to double the Time of such their Absence, by future Service, over and above other 
Damages and Costs which the Master and Dame shall sustain by such unlawful De- 
parture. XXX [V. And it is further enacted, \}n?it whosoever shall be proved to have 
transported or contrived the Transportation of any such Apprentice, Servant, or 
Slave, shall be fined Five Pounds, and all such Damages as the Court shall judge, 
and that the Master or Dame can make appear, and if not able to be left to the Judge- 
ment of the Court. // is further enacted, that every Inhabitant that shall harbour or 
entertain any such Apprentice, Servant, or Slave, and knowing that he hath absented 
himself from his Service upon Proof thereof, shall forfeit to their Master or Dame 
Ten Shillings for every days Entertainment or Concealment, and if not able to satisfy, 
to be liable to the Judgement of the Court." — New Jersey Lmws, 109. 

40. Maryland : — Runaw^ays. 

1676, June. An Act against rnnawavs. — La-w^ of Maryhvid, Bacon, Lndcx. 

41. East New Jersey : — Fugitive servants. 

1682, March. Laws passed by General Assembly in East New Jersey. Chap. IX 
A Hill against fugitive Servants, and entertainers of them. Be it enacted by the Gov- 



96 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laws. [App. a. 

ernor, Council, and Deputies in General Assembly met, and by the Authority of the 
same, that every Apprentice, or Servant, that shall depart or absent themselves from 
their Master or Mistress, without leave first obtained, shall be adjudged by the Court to 
double the Time of such their absence by future Service, besides all Costs and Damages, 
which the master or mistress shall have sustained by such unlawful Departure. Be it 
further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, that whosoever shall knowingly transport or 
contrive the Transportation of any Apprentice, Servant, or Slave, or be any aiding or 
assisting thereto, and be thereof lawfully convicted, shall be fined Five Pounds, and 
make full Satisfaction to the master or mistress of such Apprentice, Servant, or Slave, 
for all Costs or Damages which the said master or mistress can make appear to have 
thereby sustained. Be it further enacted By the Authority aforesaid, that every Inhab- 
itant, who shall entertain, or afford any manner of Relief to such Apprentice, Servant, 
or Slave, knowing that he hath absented himself as aforesaid, except of real Charity, 
and thereof be lawfully convicted, shall pay to the master or mistress of such Servant 
Ten Shillings for every Days Entertainment and concealment, and be fined accord- 
ing to the Discretion of the Court." — Acts of the Proprietary Government of New 
Jersey, 23S. 

42. New Jersey: — Prevention ofruna-ways. 

1683. No title given. General Assembly. VI. " And for the preventing Servants 
running away from their Masters, and other Vagabonds, Be it hereby enacted by the au- 
thority aforesaid, that all Magistrates, Officiers, Ordinary Keepers, and other Inhabitants 
within this Province, take special notice of all suspicious Travellers, and require their 
pass or certificates, under the Hand and Seal of the Magistrate or Magistrates, or Publick 
Notary of the Place of their last Abode, to satisfy the clearness of his, her, or their 
coming away, and for want of such Pass or Certificate, to secure such Person or Per- 
sons into the Custody of the next constable; which Person and Persons so to be se- 
cured, or their Masters, shall pay such Charge and Trouble as the Person or Persons 
shall be put to, in the securing them as aforesaid, before they shall be discharged, at 
the Discretion of two or more of the Magistrates of the said Province." — O Acts of the 
Proprietary Goveriunents of jVew fersey, 477. 

43. South Carolina . — Prevention of runaways. 

1683, Nov. 7.' An Act to prevent Runaways. Title only preserved. Table of con- 
tents. — Statutes at Large of South Carolina, II. 

44. Virginia : — Repeal of law of 1663, September. 

1684, April. Act III. An act repealing the act concerning the persuit of runawayes. 
The law of September, 1663, has been found inconvenient in practice, it is therefore 
repealed. — Statutes at Large. He7iiug, Laws of Virginia, III. 12. 

45. East New Jersey : — Runa'wray servants. [§ 2.] 

1686, April. Chap. XI. An Act concerning Runaway Servants. Whereas the secur- 
ing of Servants that Runaway, or otherwise absent themselves from their Masters lawful 
Occasions, is found a material encouragement to such Persons as come into this country 
to settle Plantations and Populate the Province ; for the better encouragement of such 
Persons, Be it therefore enacted by the Governor and Council and Deputies now met in 
General Assembly, and by the authority of the same, that if any Servant or Servants, 
Prentices or Covenant Servants, Run away or absent him or herself unlawfully from 
their Masters or Mistress' Service, being taken up or secured, so that the master or 
mistress hath him or her again, for the better Encouragement of such Person or Per- 
sons so securing him or them, they shall have Twenty Shillings paid him or them," 
etc. — N'ew jtersey Laws, 292. 

46. Virginia : Lavr of 1670 amended. 

1686, October. Act I. Slight change in making out the certificate for apprehension 
of runaway. — Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, III. 29. 



1682-1705.] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 97 

47. South Carolina : — Inhibition of trade with runaways. 

1691. An act inhibiting the tracking with Servants and Slaves. ''And it is alsoe 
enacted by the authority aforesaid, that if any servant or servants shall at any tyme or 
tymes hereafter absent or withdraw him or themselves from his, her, or their master or 
mistresses service, such servant or servants soe offending shall for every naturall day 
they shall soe absent themselves serve one whole weeke, and for every weeke, if they 
shall att any one tyme soe long absent themselves, one whole yeare to theire master or 
mistresse, over and above their contracted tyme of servitude." — O Statutes at Large 
of South Carolina, II. 53. 

48. Pennsylvania : — Regulation of servants. 

1700. An Act for the better Regulation of Servants in this Province and Territories. 
" And for the Prevention of Servants quitting their masters Service, Be it enacted by the 
Authority aforesaid, that if any Servant shall absent him or herself from the Service of 
their Master or Owner for the Space of one Day, or more, without Leave first obtained 
for the same, every such Servant shall, for every such Days absence, be obliged to 
serve Five Days after the Expiration of his or her Time, and shall further make such 
Satisfaction to his or her INIaster or Owner for the Damages and Charges sustained by 
such Absence as the respective County Courts shall see meet, who shall order as well 
the Time to be served, as other Recompence for Damages sustained. And whosoever 
shall apprehend or take up any Runaway Servant, and shall bring him or her to the 
Sheriff of the County, such Person shall for every such Servant, if taken up within 
Ten miles of the Servants abode, receive Ten Shillings; and if Ten miles or upwards, 
Tiventy Shillings Reward of the said Sheriff, who is hereby required to pay the same, 
and forthwith to send Notice to the master or Owner, of whom he shall receive Five 
Shillings Prison Fees upon the Delivery of the said Servant, together with all other 
Disbursements and reasonable Charges for and upon the same." — O Province Laws of 
Pennsylvania, I. 5. 

49. New York : — Regulation of slaves. 

1702. An Act for regulating Slaves. " And be it further enacted, etc , That no Per- 
son or Persons whatsoever do hereafter Employ, Harbour, Conceal or Entertain other 
Men's Slaves at their House, Out-house, or Plantation, without the consent of their 
master or mistress, either signified to them verbally, or by Certificate in writing, under 
the said Master or Mistress' Hand upon Forfeiture of Five Pounds for every Night or 
Day, to the Master or Mistress of such Slave or Slaves, so that the Penalty of such 
Slave do not exceed the value of the said Slave. And if any Person or Persons what- 
soever shall be found guilty of Harbouring, Entertaining, or Concealing of any Slave, 
or assisting to the Conveying them away, if such Slave shall happen to be lost, dead, or 
otherwise distroyed, such Person or Persons, so Harbouring, Entertaining, Concealing, 
Assisting or Conveying of them away, shall be also liable to pay the Value of such Slave 
to the master or mistress, to be recovered by Action of Debt, in manner aforesaid." — 
O Acts of Province of Nezv York from 1691 to 171S, p. 5S. 

50. Ne^v York : — Punishment of runaw^ays to Canada. [§ 8.] 

1705. An act to prevent the Running away of Negro Slaves out of the City and 
County of Albany, to the French at Canada. " Whereas the City and County of 
Albany are the Frontiers of this Province toward the French of Canada; and that it is 
of great concern to this Colony, during this time of War with the French, that no Intel- 
ligence be carried from the said City and County to the French at Canada : ... Be it 
enacted, and it is hereby enacted by his Excellency the Governor, Council and Assembly, 
etc., that all and every Negro Slave or Slaves, belonging to any of the Inhabitants of the 
city and county of Albany, who shall from and after the First Day of August of this 
present year of our Lord, One thousand seven hundred and five, be found traveling 
Forty miles above the City of Albany, at or above a certain place called Sarachtoge 

7 



98 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laivs. [App. A. 

(unless in Company of his, her, or their Master, Mistress, or such employed by them, 
or either of them), and be thereof convicted by the Oaths of Two or more credible 
Witnesses, before the Court of Sessions of the Peace of the said City and County 
(which Court of Sessions are hereby Authorized and Impowered to hear and determine 
the same, in manner aforesaid, and thereupon to award execution), he, she, or they so 
Convicted, shall suffer the Pains of Death, as in cases of Felony." — Acts of Province 
of New York, 77. 

51. New York : — Act of 1702 revived. 

1705. An act for Reviving and continuing an Act, Intituled, An Act for Regulating 
Slaves, 1702 (expired in 1712). — Acts of the Province of A\'w York, 79.* 

52. Virginia : — Runa-way servants and slaves. 

1705, October. Chap. XLIX. An Act concerning Servants and Slaves. XXI. Pen- 
alty for entertaining runaway servants without a certificate shall be for every day sixty 
pounds of tobacco. XXIII. Persons rewarded for taking up runaway according to 
the distance. — Heninq; Lmvs of Virginia, II. 447. 

53. Massachusetts Bay : — Regulation of free negroes. [§ 4.] 

1707. An Act for the regulating of free negroes. "Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, 
that every free negro or mulatto who shall harbour or entertain any negro or mulatto 
servant in his or her house, without the leave or consent of their respective masters or 
mistresses, shall forfeit and pay the sum of five shillings to the use of the poor of the 
town, for each offence." — Charters and General Laws of the Colony and Province of 
Massacliuselts Bay, 3S6. 

54 South Carolina — For the better ordering of slaves. 

1712. Statutes at Large of South Catoliua, II. 381. 

55 New Jersey —Regulation of slaves 

1713. An Act for Regulating of Slaves Sec. 2. "Negroes, etc., not having a pass 
may be taken up if 5 mites from Home whipped, and Persons so taking up have 5!-." 
Sec. 3. "Negro belonging to another Province not having license, to be whipped, 
and the Taker of them to have los." — Acts of the Assembly of A^cm Jersey, 18. 

56. New Jersey : — Regulation of white servants 

1713. An Act for regulating of White Servants, and taking up Soldiers and Seamen 
deserting Her Majestys Service, and coming into this Colony. Sec. 2. " Servants 
absenting without leave to be adjudged by any one Justice to serve double the time, 
and pay or serve for costs." Sec. 3. " Those who counsel, aid, etc. such Servants to 
runaway, to forfeit I0;C." etc. Sec. 4. " Those who knowingly conceal them, to pay 
IOJ-. per Day." Sec. 5. "Those who take up Runaways and carry them back to have 
ly. and 6d. per mile for so doing." Sec. 8. " Any Boatman, etc., who shall carry them 
into or out of this Province, etc., not having Passes, as aforesaid, and Publick-House- 
keepers entertaining them to forfeit 40.?.," tic — Acts of the Assembly of Nr^v Jersey, 24. 

57. Rhode Island : — Ferriage of runaways. [§ 4.] 

1714, Oct. 27. " Whereas, several negroes and mulatto slaves that have run away 
from their masters or mistresses, under pretence of being sent or employed by their 
masters or mistresses upon some service, and have been carried over the ferries, out 
and into the colony, and suffered to pass through the several towns under the afore- 
said pretence, to the considerable damage and charge of their owner.s, and many times 
to the loss of their slaves; — Be it therefore enacted by this A.ssembly, and by the 
authority thereof it is enacted, that no ferryman or boatman whatsoever, within this 
colonv, shall carry or bring any slave as aforesaid over their ferries, without a certifi- 
cate under the hands of their masters or mistresses, or some person in authority, upon 
the penalty of paying all costs and damages their said masters or mistresses shall sus- 
tain thereby; and to pay a fine of twenty shillings for the use of the colony, for each 
offence, as aforesaid. The said fine to be recovered by any two justices of the peace, 



1705-1718.] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 99 

upon confession or conviction of the said fact ; and all persons in authority, and 
other His Majesty's Subjects in this colony knowing of any such slaves traveling 
through their township, wherein they dwell, without a certificate, as aforesaid, they 
are hereby required to cause such slave to be examined and secured so as the owner 
may be notified thereof, and have his slave again, paying the costs and charges that 
shall accrue thereon." — Proceedings of General Assembly, Colony of Rhode Island and 
Prorjidence Plantations, Providence, 177 ; Records of Colony of Rhode Island, 177. 

58. South Carolina : — Additional Act to Act of 1712. 
17x4. SfiTfiites at Large of South Carolina, II. 620. 

59. New York : — Act of 1705 revived. [§ 8.] 

1715. An Act for Reviving and Continuing an Act, Intituled an act to prevent the 
Running away of Negro Slaves out of the city and county of Albany to the French at 
Albany, 1705. — Laws Proz'ince of Neia York, 218. 

60. North Carolina : — Servants and slaves. 

1715. An Act concerning servants and Slaves. Title only given. — Latvs of Noi-th 
Carolina, 21, 27. 

61. New Hampshire : — Runaway minors and servants. 

1715. An Act for preventing Men's Sons or Servants absenting themselves from their 
Parents or Masters Service without Leave. — " That no commander of any private man 
of war, or master of any merchant ship or vessel coming into, tarrying or abiding in, or 
going forth of any port, harbour, or place within this province, shall receive, harbour, 
entertain, conceal or secure on board such ship or other vessel, or suffer to be there 
harbour'd or detain'd any man's son, being under age or apprentice or covenant ser- 
vant (knowing him to be such, or after notice thereof givenj without license or consent 
of his parent or master in writing under his hand first had and obtain'd, on pain of for- 
feiting the sum oi five pounds per week, and so proportionably for a longer or shorter 
time, that any son, apprentice, or servant shall be held, harbour'd, conceal'd, or de- 
tain'd on board any such ship or other vessel, as aforesaid, without license and consent 
as aforesaid ; the one moiety thereof to her Majesty, to be employed toward the sup- 
port of the government of the province, and the other moiety unto the parent or master 
of such son, apprentice or servant that shall inform, or sue for the same, in any of her 
majesty's courts of record, within this province, by bill, plaint, or information, wherein 
no essoign, protection or wager of law shall be allowed. § 2. And be it further 
enacted by the autJiority aforesaid, that every apprentice or covenant servant who 
shall unlawfully absent himself from his master, and enter himself on board any ship 
or vessel, as aforesaid, with intent to leave his master's service, or incline there more 
than the space of twenty-four hours, and be thereof convicted before any two of her 
majesty's justices of the peace, or in general sessions, within this province, shall forfeit 
unto his master such further service, from and after the expiration of the term 
which his said master had in him at the time of his departure as the said court shall 
order, not exceeding one year." — O Acts and Laws of His Majesty's Province of New 
Hampshire, 40. 

62. South Carolina : — Additional Act against runaways. 

1717. Statutes at Large of South Carolina, III. 39. 

63. Massachusetts Bay : — Transportation of apprentices and servants. 

1718, October. An Act for the preventing of persons under age, apprentices or ser- 
vants, being transported out of the province without the consent of their masters, parents, 
or guardians. "Every master of any outward bound ship or vessel that shall hereafter 
carry or transport out of this province any person under age, or bought or hired ser- 
vant or apprentice, to any parts beyond the seas, without the consent of such master, 
parent or guardian, signified in writing, shall forfeit the sum of fifty pounds," etc. — 
Charters and Laws of the Colony aiid Province of Massachusetts Bay, 750. 



100 



Fiiiritivc Slaves : — Colonial Laws. [App. a. 



64. South Carolina ; —Regulation of Slaves. 

1722. An Act for the better ordering and governing of slaves. — Slattctes at Large of 
South Carolina, 193. 

65. Pennsylvania : — Regulation of negroes. 

1725 An Act for the better Regulating of negroes in this province. "And be it 
further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that no Person or Persons whatsoever shall 
imploy. or knowingly harbour, conceal, or entertain other Peoples slaves at their Houses, 
Out Houses, or Plantations, without the Masters or Owners consent, excepting in 
stress of weather or other E.xtraordinary Occasion, under the Penalty of Thirty Shil- 
liii'^s for every Twenty four Hours he or they shall entertain or harbour him or them 
as aforesaid." — Province Laius of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1725. 

66 Virginia : — Earlier act amended. 

1726, May. Cliap. III. The clause in regard to imprisonment when slave would not 
give name of master has proved very inconvenient. Chap. IV. An Act for amending 
the Act concerning Servants and Slaves; and for the further preventing the clandestine 
transportation of Persons out of this colony. IV. The sheriff or under sheriff to whom 
the slave is committed shall cause a notice containing a full description of the runaway 
to be posted on the door of the court-house, and shall send a copy to each church or 
chapel within the county which shall be set up " in some open and convenient place " 
on every Lord's day for two months. Neglect on part of the sheriff shall be fined five 
hundred pounds of tobacco ; on the part of the clerk, two hundred pounds. VI. Pro- 
visions in regard to transportation. VIII. Runaways may be let out to hire by the 
keeper of the gaol. IX. When demanded by the owner, the person hireing shall de- 
liver up the servant. X. "'Provided also, that where the keeper of the said public gaol 
shall, by the direction of such court or courts, as aforesaid, let out any such negro or run- 
away to hire to any person or persons whatsoever, the said keeper shall, at the time of 
his delivery, cause a strong iron collar to be put on the neck of such negro or runaway, 
with the letters (P. G.) stamped thereon ; and that thereafter the said keeper shall not 
be answerable for any escape of the said negro or runaway." XII. Fees of the 
goalers given. XIII. Runaways from Maryland or Carolina shall be committed to 
any public gaol, and the fees shall be according to the laws of the province wherein 
the master dwells. XIV. The keeper of the gaol shall send descriptions of the run- 
away to such places of this dominion bordering on Maryland or Carolina as shall be 
agreed upon. XV., XVI. Fees described. XVIII. Masters of vessels shall take the 
following oath: " I, A. B., master of the ship (or vessel), do swear that I will make dili- 
gent enquiry and search in my said ship (or vessel), and will not knowingly or willingly 
carry, or suffer to be carried, in my said ship, out of this dominion, without such pass 
as is directed by law, any person or persons whatsoever, that I shall know to be running 
hence in order to deceive their creditors ; nor any servant or slave that is not attending 
his or her master or owner, or sent by such master or owner. XX. For forging a pass 
persons offending shall stand two hours in the pillory, and receive thirty lashes at the 
whipping-post. XXI. A white servant who shall run away, change his name, or dis- 
guise himself with intent to escape, shall serve six months longer than his term for 
running away. — Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virgi)iia, IV. 16S. 
67. Connecticut : — Runaway servants and slaves. 

1730 (i)robably). An Act concerning Indian, Molatto, and Negro Servants and 
Slaves. "That whatsoever Negro, Molatto, or Indian Servant, or Servants shall be 
found wandering out of the Bounds of the Town, or Place to which they belong, with- 
out a Ticket or Pass in writing, under the Hand of some Assistant or Justice of the 
Peace, or under the Hand of the Master, or Owner of such negro, molatto, or Indian 
Servants shall be deemed and Accounted to be Run-aways, and may be Treated as such ; 
and every Person Inhabiting this colony. Finding or Meeting with any such Negro, 



1722-1740] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 10 1 

molatto, or Indian Servant or Servants, not having a ticket as aforesaid, is hereby 
impowered to Seize and Secure him, or them, and Bring him or them before the next 
Authority to be Examined, and Returned to his, or their master or Owner, who shall 
satisfy the Charge Accruing thereby. And all Ferry-Men within this colony, are hereby 
Required not to suffer any Indian, molatto or negro servant without certificate, as afore- 
said, to pass over their Respective Ferries, by Assisting them therein Directly or Indi- 
rectly, on Penalty of paying a Fine of Twenty Shillings for every such Offence." — O Acts 
and La-cus of His RIajcstie's Colony of Connecticut, 229. 

68. New York : — Slave insurrections, etc. 

1730. An Act for the more effectual preventing and punishing the conspiracy and 
Insurrection of negroes and other Slaves; for the better regulating them, and for 
repealing the acts therein mentioned, relating thereto. Passed the 29th of October, 
1730. No fugitive slave provision. Penalty for entertaining Slaves as in 1702. Also 
Persons who do not discover those that entertain slaves shall pay Forty Shillings. — 
Acts of Province of New York, 193. 

69. South Carolina: — Regulation of slaves. 
1735. Statutes at large of South Carolina, III. 405. 

70. Delaware ; — Regulation of servants and slaves. 

1740. An Act for the better regulation of Servants and Slaves within this govern- 
ment (a). Sec. 5. "Be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, that from such time as 
any servant shall absent him or herself from his or her masters or mistress' service, 
without leave first obtained for the same, every such servant, for such absence, and the 
expenses of taking up, shall at the expiration of the time of his or her servitude, make 
satisfaction by servitude, according to the judgement of any court of Quarter Sessions 
within this government." Sec. 6. " And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, 
that if any person shall apprehend or take up any runaway servant and carry him or 
her before the next Justice of the Peace of the county where such servant shall be so 
taken up, in order to be sent to and secured in the gaol of the said county, for his or 
her master's or mistress' service." The sheriff or gaoler shall then send notice to the 
servant's owner, if known ; if not, the servant shall be advertised in some newspaper in 
the city of Philadelphia. The reward for taking up runaways shall be, " if ten miles dis- 
tant from the place of the said servants last abode, or under, the sum of Ten Shillings, 
if upwards of ten miles, the sum of Twenty Shillings." " And if the master or owner of 
such servant so imprisoned shall, for the space of six weeks next after notice had of his 
or her servants imprisonment, neglect or refuse to release such servant, it shall and 
may be lawful for the said Sheriff, and he is hereby required and commanded, upon affi- 
davit made of the due service of such notice, to expose every such servant to sale at 
public vendue, and him or her to sell to the highest bidder, for such term and sum as 
shall be sufficient for the defraying the "costs and charges arising upon the apprehend- 
ing and imprisoning the said servant." Sec. 7. " Suspicious persons travelling without 
a pass shall be deemed runaway servants and treated as such." — Laws of Delaware, 
zi\, 212. 

71. Delaware : — Regulation of servants and slaves. 

1740. An Act for the better regulatfon of Servants and Slaves within this Govern- 
ment. " Sec. 14. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that who so ever 
shall take up any negro or mulatto slave at above ten miles distance from his or her 
masters or mistress' dwelling or habitation, and not having leave in writing from his 
or her master or mistress, or not being known by the taker-up to be about his or her 
master's or mistress' business or service, and shall convey him or her to the habitation 
of his or her said master or mistress, if known, such taker-up shall receive of the said 
master or mistress, for his reward, the sum of Five Shillings, with reasonable charges. 
iSec. 15. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that no person shall 



102 Fugitive Slaves: — Colonial Laws. [App. A. 

employ or knowingly harbour, conceal or entertain another's servant or slave at his or 
her house or plantation without the master or owner's leave and consent, except in 
distress of weather or other extraordinary occasion or accident, under the penalty of 
Forty Shillings for every twenty four hours he or she shall entertain any such servant 
or slave, as afore said, and so in proportion for any lesser time." — O Laws of the State 
of Delaware, 215, 216. 

72. South Carolina : —Regulation of slaves. 

1740. Statutes at Large, South Caroli)ia, III. 56S. 

73. North Carolina : — Entertainment of runa'wrays, etc. [§ 3.] 

1741. XXVII. ..Any person harbouring a runaway shall be prosecuted and com- 
pelled to pay the sum of twenty-five pounds or serve the owner of the slave or his 
assigns five years. If he actually carry away the slave, he shall be convicted of felony 
and suffer accordingly. XXVIII. Seven shillings and sixpence, Proclamation money, 
reward for taking up runaways. For every mile over ten, threepence. XXXIV. Run- 
aways when taken up shall be whipped. XXXV. Constables must give a receipt for 
runaway. Any failure shall be fined twenty shillings. Proclamation money, to be paid 
the church warden. XXXVI. Sheriff who shall hold a runaway longer than the act 
directs shall forfeit five pounds. Sheriff who allows a runaway to escape is liable 
to action from the party grieved. XXXVIII. This article takes up the fees of the 
jailor, etc. — Laws of North Carolina, 89. 

74. Virginia : — Ferriage of runavrays. 

1748, Oct. An Act for the Settlement and Regulation of Ferries, and for the Despatch 
of Public Expresses. VI. All constables and their assistants charged with conducting 
any runaway servant shall be passed ferry free. The ferriage shall then be paid by the 
owners of the runaways. — Statutes at Large, Hening, VI. 22. 

75. South Carolina : Act additional to Act of 1740. 
1751. Statutes at Large of South Carolina, III. 738. 

76. Rhode Island : — Assistance of runaways. 

1766-1798. An Act relative to Slaves, and to their Manumission and support. — 
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, that if . any person shall conceal any negro or 
mulatto slave, or shall in any manner assist such slave in escaping from the lawful 
authority of his or her master, the person so offending shall forfeit and pay the sum 
of three hundred dollars, to be recovered by action of debt, one moiety thereof to 
and for the use of the State, and the other moiety thereof to and for the use of the 
person who shall sue for the same. — Laws of Rhode Island and Prozndence Planta- 
tions, 607. 

77. North Carolina :— Slave stealing. 

1779. An Act to prevent the stealing of Slaves, or by Violence, Seduction, or any 
other Means, taking or conveying away any Slave or Slaves the Property of another, 
and for other Purposes therein mentioned. IV. And whereas many evil disposed Per- 
sons frequently entice or persuade Slaves (without any Intention to steal them) and 
Servants, to absent themselves from their Master or Mistress, and often times harbour 
and maintain runaway Servants and Slaves ; Be it therefore further enacted by the 
authority aforesaid, that any Person or Persons who shall hereafter entice or persuade 
any Servant or Slave to absent him or herself from his or her Master or Mistress, or 
who shall harbour or maintain any runawav Servant or Slave, shall for every such 
Offence forfeit or pay to the Master or Mistress of such Servant or Slave, the sum of 
one hundred Pounds current money, to be recovered by Action of Debt, in any Juris- 
diction having Cognizance thereof ; and be further liable to the said master or mistress 
in an action for Damages, where in no Essoign, Injunction, Protection, or Wager of 
Law shall be allowed or admitted, notwithstanding any Law, Usage, or Custom to the 
contrary. — Laws of North Ca7-olina, 371. 



I740-I779-1 Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 103 

78. Connecticut : — Escape of negroes and servants. 

No date given. An Act to prevent the Running away of Indian and Negro Servants. 
" Be it enacted by the Governour, Council, and Representatives, in General Court assem- 
bled, and by the Authority of the same, that whatsoever Negro or Indian Servant or Ser- 
vants shall at any time after the publication hereof be found wandering out of the Town 
Bounds, or Place to which they belong, without a Ticket or Pass in writing under the Hand 
of some Assistant or Justice of the Peace, or under the Hand of the Master or Owner of 
such Negro or Indian Servant or Servants, shall be deemed and accounted to be Run-a- 
ways ; and every person Inhabiting in this Colony, finding or meeting with any such Negro 
or Indian Servant or Servants, not having a Ticket as aforesaid, is hereby impowered 
to seize and secure him or them, and bring him or them before the next authority, to be 
examined and returned to his or their Master or Owner, who shall satisfy the charge 
accruing thereby; and all Ferrymen within this Colony are hereby required not to 
suffer any Indian or Negro Servant, without Certificate as aforesaid, to pass over their 
respective Ferrys, by assisting of them therein directly or indirectly, on penalty of paying 
a fine of Twenty Shillings for every such Offence to the County Treasury, to be levied 
on their estates upon non-payment, by warrant from auy one Assistant or Justice of the 
Peace : And the like methods shall or may be used and observed as to Vagrant or 
Suspected Persons, found wandring from Town to Town, having no Certificate as afore- 
said, who shall be seized and conveyed before the next Authority to be Examined and 
Disposed of according to Law : And if any Free Negroes shall travel without such 
Certificate or Pass, and be stopped, seized, or taken up, they shall pay all Charges 
arising thereby." — O Acts and Laws of His Majesty's Province of Connecticut, 87. 

79. Connecticut : — Pursuit of runavo-ays. 

No date given. " It is also ordered, that when any servants shall runn from theire 
Masters, or any other inhabitants shall privately goe away with supition of ill intentions, 
It shall bee lawfull for the next Magistrate, or the constable and two of the chiefest in- 
habitants where no magistrate is, to press men and boates or pinnaces, at the publique 
charge, to persue such persons by sea or land, and bring them back by force of amies." 
— O Colotiial Records of Connecticut, I. 539. 

80. Pennsylvania : — Harboring fugitives. 

Anno Regni Duodecimo Georgii Regis. [1726 ?] An Act for the better regulating 
of Negroes in this Province. " And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, 
that no Person or Persons whatsoever shall Employ, or knowingly harbour, conceal, or 
entertain other Peoples Slaves at their Houses, Out-houses, or Plantations, without the 
Master or Owner's consent ; excepting in Distress of weather or other E.xtraordinary 
Occasion, under the Penalty of Thirty Shillings for every twenty-four Hours he or they 
shall entertain or harbour him or them as aforesaid." — O Province Laws of Pennsylva- 
nia, 325. 



APPENDIX B. 

NATIONAL ACTS AND PROPOSITIONS RELATIVE TO 
FUGITIVE SLAVES. 1778-1854. 



This Appendix contains all the important bills, acts, and treaties from the founda- 
tion of the Constitution to i860. Many minor propositions may be found through 
the foot-notes to the text of Chapter II. The figures in brackets [j refer back to the 
text of the monograph. 

1. Fugitive clause in treaty with the Delawares. 

1778, Aug. 7. Art. IV. "And it is further agreed between the parties aforesaid, 
that neither shall entertain or give countenance to the enemies of the other, or protect 
in their respective States, criminal fugitives, servants, or slaves, but the same to appre- 
hend, and secure and deliver to the State or States to which such enemies, criminals, 
servants, or slaves respectively belong." — Statutes at Large, VII. 14. 

2. Fugitive clause in the treaty of peace. [§§ 13, 22.] 

1782-83. 1782, Nov. 13. Provisional articles. 1783, Sept. 3. Definitive treaty. 
" His Britannic Majesty shall, with all convenient speed, and without causing any de- 
struction, or carrying away any negroes or other property of the American inhabitants, 
withdraw all his armies, garrisons, and fleets from the said United States." — Treaties 
and Conventions, ed. of 18S9, pp. 372, 37S. 

3. Fugitive clauses in Indian treaties. [§ 13.] 
1784-86. 1784, Oct. 22. Treaty with the Six Nations, Art. I. 

1785, Jan. 21. Treaty with the Wyandots, etc. Art. I. " All the prisoners white and 
black" taken by the Indians "shall be delivered up" or "restored." — Statutes at 
Large, VII. 15, 16. 

4. Fugitive clause in King's ordinance. [§ 14.] 

1785, April 6. Report of the Committee on Government of the Western Territory. 
" Provided that always, upon the escape of any person into any of the States described 
in the resolve of Congress of the twenty-third day of April, 1784, from whom labor or ser- 
vice is lawfully claimed in anyone of the thirteen original States, such fugitive might be 
lawfully reclaimed and carried back to the person claiming his labor or service, this re- 
solve notwithstanding." — Papers of Old Congress, XXI. 331, cited in Bancroft, History 
of the United States [last Revision), VI. 133. 

5. Fugitive clauses in Indian treaties. [§ 13] 

1785, Nov. 28. Treaty with the Cherokees, Art. I. 

1786, Jan. 3. Treaty with the Choctaws, Art. I. 
1786, Jan. 10. Treaty with the Chickasaws, Art. I. 

Identical clauses. The Indians " to restore all the Negroes and all other property 
taken during the late war." 

[104] 



,778 1793-1 Treaties and First Act. 105 

1786, June 31. Treaty with the Shawanees. Art. I. " All prisoners white and black 
taken in the late war from among the citizens of the United States by the Shawanee 
nation shall be restored." — Statutes at La>\i;e, VII. iS, 21, 25, 26. 

6 Fugitive clause in Northwest Ordinance of 1787. [§ 14 ] 

1787, July 13. Art. VI. " There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude 
in the said Territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall 
have been duly convicted ; provided, always, that any person escaping into the same, 
from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the original States, such 
fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or her 
labor or service aforesaid." Read first time, July il, 1787. Passed July 13, 1787. — 
O Journals of Congress, XII. 84, 92. 

7. Fugitive clause in the Constitution. [§ 15.] 

1787, Sept. 13. Art. IV. § 2. " No person held to service or labor in one State, under 
the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation 
therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of 
the party to whom such service or labor may be due." — Revised Staticies of the United 
States, I. 18. ' 

8. Clauses for returning fugitives in Indian treaties. 

1789, Jan. 7. Treaty with the Wiandots, etc. Art. I. " The said nations agree to 
deliver up all the prisoners now in their hands .(by what means soever they may have 
come into their possession)." — Statutes at Large, VII. 28. 

1790-91. 1790, Apr. 7. Treaty with the Creeks. Art. III. "The Creek Nation 
shall deliver ... all citizens of the United States, white inhabitants or negroes, who are 
now prisoners in any part of the said nation. And if any such prisoners or negroes 
should not be delivered on or before the first day of June next ensuing, the governor of 
Georgia may empower three persons to repair to the said nation, in order to claim and 
receive such prisoners and negroes." — Statutes at Large, VII. 35. 

1791, July 2. Treaty with the Cherokees. Art. III. All prisoners to be yielded up 
on both sides. — Statutes at La>ge, VII. 36. 

9. First Fugitive Slave Act. 

1793, Feb. 12. An Act respecting fugitives from justice and persons escaping from the 

service of their masters. 
" Section i. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever the executive authority of any 
stale in the Union, or of either of the territories northwest or south of the river Ohio, 
shall demand any person as a fugitive from justice, of the executive authority of any 
such state or territory to which such person shall have fled, and shall moreover pro- 
duce the copy of an indictment found, or an affidavit made before a magistrate of any 
state or territory as aforesaid, charging the person so demanded, with having committed 
treason, felony or other crime, certified as authentic by the governor or chief magistrate 
of the state or territory from whence the person so charged fied, it shall be the duty of 
the executive authority of the state or territory to which such person shall have fled, 
to cause him or her to be arrested and secured, and notice of the arrest to be given to 
the executive authority making such demand, or to the agent of such authority appointed 
to receive the fugitive, and to cause the fugitive to be delivered to such agent when 
he shall appear : But if no such agent shall appear within six months from the time of 
the arrest, the prisoner may be discharged. And all costs or expenses incurred in the 
apprehending, securing, and transmitting such fugitive to the state or territory making 
such demand, shall be^paid by such state or territory. 

" Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That any agent, appointed as aforesaid, who shall 
receive the fugitive into his custody, shall be empowered to transport him or her to the 



io6 Fugitive Slaves: — National Acts. [App. b. 

state or territory from which he or she shall have fled. And if any person or persons 
shall by force set at liberty, or rescue the fugitive from such agent while transporting, 
as aforesaid, the person or persons so offending shall, on conviction, be fined not 
exceeding five hundred dollars, and be imprisoned not exceeding one year. 

" Sec. 3. A)id be it also enacted. That when a person held to labour in any of the 
United States, or in either of the territories on the northwest or south of the river 
Ohio, under the laws thereof, shall escape into any other of the said states or territory, 
the person to whom such labour or service may be due, his agent or attorney, is hereby 
empowered to seize or arrest such fugitive from labour, and to take him or her before 
any judge of the circuit or district courts of the United States, residing or being within 
the state, or before any magistrate of a county, city or town corporate, wherein such 
seizure or arrest shall be made, and upon proof to the satisfaction of such judge or 
magistrate, either by oral testimony or aftidavit taken before and certified by a magis- 
trate of any such state or territory, that the person so seized or arrested, doth, under 
the laws of the state or territory from which he or she fled, owe service or labour to 
the person claiming him or her, it shall be the duty of such judge or magistrate to give 
a certificate thereof to such claimant, his agent or attorney, which shall be sufficient 
warrant for removing the said fugitive from labour, to the state or territory from which 
he or she fled. 

" Sec. 4. And be it further ettdcted. That any person who shall knowingly and willingly 
obstruct or hinder such claimant, his agent or attorney, in so seizing or arresting such 
fugitive from labour, or shall rescue such fugitive from such claimant, his agent or at- 
torney when so arrested pursuant to the authority herein given or declared ; or shall 
harbor or conceal such person after notice that he or she was a fugitive from labour, 
as aforesaid, shall, for either of the said offences, forfeit and pay the sum of five hun- 
dred dollars. Which penalty may be recovered by and for the benefit of such claimant, 
by action of debt, in any court proper to try the same ; saving moreover to the person 
claiming such labour or service, his right of action for or on account of the said injuries 
or either of them." — O Statutes at Large, I. 302-305. 

10. Abstract of amendatory bill on fugitives. [§ 19.] 

1801, Dec. 18. " The bill contemplates inflicting a penalty of five hundred dollars on 
any person harboring, concealing, or employing runaway slaves. Every person employ- 
ing a black person, unless he had a certificate with a county seal to it, or signed by a 
justice of the peace, would be liable to the penalty." 

1802, Jan. 15. A motion wis made to strike out the second section of the bill, 
which would create therein and inflict the penalty for employing a person of color who 
has not a certificate of his freedom. Motion not carried. — 7 Coug. 1 Sess., Annals of 
Congress, fl. of R., 423. 

11. Restoration of slaves by Indian treaties. [§ 22.] 

1814, Aug. 9. Treaty with the Creeks. Art. III. "The United States demand that 
a surrender be immediately made of all the persons and property taken from the citizens 
of the United States ... to the respective owners." — Treaties and Conventions. 

12. Fugitive slave clause in the Treaty of Ghent. [§ 22]. 

1814, Dec. 24. Art. I. " All territory, etc. shall be restored without delay, and with- 
out causing any destruction or carrying away any artillery, ... or any slaves or other 
private property." — Treaties and Conventiojis. 

13. Amendments proposed to Pindall's bill. [§ 20] 

1818, Jan. 29. " Resolved, That the said bill be referred to the committee to whom 
was referred the memorial of the annual meeting of the Society of Friends, of Balti- 
more, with instructions to inquire into the expediency of so amending the said IdIH as 
to guard more effectually against infringement of the rights of free negroes and other 
persons of color." Introduced by Mr. Rich. Resolution not accepted. — House Journal 
15 Cong. 1 Sess., 193; Annals of Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., S30. 



1793-1821.] Bills and Propositions. 107 

To change the bill materially " by making judges of the State in which the appren- 
tices, slaves, etc. are seized, the tribunal to decide the fact of slavery, instead of the 
judges of the States whence the fugitives have escaped." Introduced by Mr. Sergeant. 
Amendment not accepted. — Annals of Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 830. 

"Mr. Rich made several successive attempts to procure amendments to the bill, 
relaxing some of its provisions, which were successively negatived." — Annals oj 
Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 830. 

14. Provision for delivery on executive requisition. [§ 20.] 

i8i3, March 11. Mr. Daggett moved to strike out the following section of the bill : 
" Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, that whenever the Executive authority of any State 
in the Union, or of either of the Territories thereof, shall, for or in behalf of any citizen 
or inhabitant of such State or Territory, demand any fugitive slave of the Executive 
authority of any State or Territory, to which such slave shall have tied, and shall more- 
over produce a certificate, issued pursuant to the first section of this act, it shall be the 
duty of the Executive authority of the State or Territory to which such fugitive shall 
have fled to cause him or her to be arrested and secured, and notice of the arrest to be 
given to the Executive authority making such demand, or to the agent of such authority 
appointed to receive the fugitive, and to cause such fugitive to be delivered to the said 
agent, on the confine or boundary of the State or Territory in which said arrest shall be, 
and in the most usual and direct route to the place from whence the said fugitive shall 
have escaped; and the reasonable expense of such arrest, detention, and delivery of 
such fugitive shall be paid by the said agent." Amendment determined in the negative. 
— Senate Journal, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 227, 22S ; Annals of Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 259. 

15. Proposed limitation to four years. [§ 20.] 

1818, May 10. Mr. Lacock moved to amend by adding the following : " Sec. -. And 
be it further enacted that this law shall be and remain in force for the term of four years, 
and no longer." The Senate being equally divided, the President determined the ques- 
tion in the affirmative. — Senate Journal, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 228; Annals of Congress, 15 
Cong. 1 Sess., 259. 

16. Fugitive Slave clause in the Missouri Compromise. [§ 21.] 

1820, March 19. The Missouri Compromise provided *' that any persons escaping 
into the same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any State or Territory 
of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the per- 
son claiming his or her labor, or service, as aforesaid." — Annals of Congress, 16 Cong. 
1 Sess., 1469, 1587. 

17. Investigation into the Pennsylvania Act. [§ 21.] 

1820, April 3. Mr. Pindall introduced the following resolution: "Resolved, That 
the Secretary of State be instructed to procure and transmit to this House, as soon as 
practicable, a copy of such late act or acts of the Pennsylvania Legislature as prohibit 
or restrain the justices, aldermen, or other magistrates or officers of that State from 
interposing in the apprehension or surrender of fugitive slaves." — House Journal, 16 
Cong. 1 Sess., 371 ; Annals of Congress, 16 Cong: 1 Sess., 1717. 

Mr. Tarr moved to amend as follows : " Provided, any such act or acts shall have 
been passed." Resolution and amendment agreed to. — //ouse Journal, 16 Cong. 1 
Sess., 371; Annals of Congress, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 1717. 

1820, April 18. Ordered, That the letter from the Secretary of State with the Act of 
the Pennsylvania Legislature accompanying it, "be committed to the committee appointed 
i8th of March to inquire into the expediency of providing by law for reclaiming per- 
sons held to service or labor in one State, and escaping therefrom into another." — 
//ouse Journal, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 427 ; Annals of Congress, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 1863. 

18. Maryland resolutions protesting against Pennsylvanians. [§21.] 

1821, Dec. 17. "Mr. Wright laid before the House an attested copy of a resolution 



io8 Fugitive Slaves: — National Acts. [App. B. 

passed by the General Assembly of the State of Maryland, complainiug of the protec- 
tion offered by the citizens of Pennsylvania to the slaves of the citizens of Maryland, 
who abscond and go into that State, and declaring that it is the duty of Congress to 
enact such a law as will prevent a continuance of the evils complained of; which resolu- 
tion was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary." — House Jou7-nal^ 17 Cong. 1 Sess., 
62 ; Ainials of Congress, 17 Cong. 1 Sess., 553. 

19. Assumption of claims on Indians for fugitives. [§ 22.] 

1832, May 9. Treaty with the Seminoles, Art. VI. "The Seminoles being anxious 
to be relieved from repeated vexatious demands for slaves and other property alleged 
to have been stolen and destroyed by them, so that they may remove unembarrassed to 
their new homes, the United States stipulate to have the same property investigated, 
and to liquidate such as may be satisfactorily established, provided the amount does 
not exceed seven thousand (7,000) did\\a.xs." — Statutes at Large, VII. 369. 

20. Calhoun's resolution on the status of slaves on the high seas. [§ 24] 

1840, April 15. "Resolved, That a ship or vessel on the high seas, in time of peace, 
ent^aoed in a lawful voyage, is, according to the laws of nations, under the exclusive 
jurisdiction of the State to which her flag belongs ; as much so as if constituting a part 
u( its own domain. 

"Resolved, That if such ship or vessel should be forced by stress of weather, or other 
unavoidable cause, into the port, and under the jurisdiction of a friendly power, she and 
her cargo, and persons on board, with their property, and all the rights belonging to 
their personal relations, as established by the laws of the State to which they belong, 
would be placed under the protection which the laws of nations extend to the unfortunate 
under such circumstances. 

" Resolved, That the brig Enterprise, which was forced unavoidably by stress of weather 
into Port Hamilton, Bermuda Island, while on a lawful voyage on the high seas from 
one port of the Union to another, comes within the principles embraced in the fore- 
going resolutions ; and that the seizure and detention of the negroes on board by the 
local authority of the island, was an act in violation of the laws of nations, and highly 
unjust to our own citizens, to whom they belong." — Cong. Globe, 26 Cong. 1 Sess., 327. 

21. "Woodbridge resolution on extradition of slaves. [§ 23 ] 

1841, Dec. 22. Mr. Woodbridge submitted the following resolution, which was con- 
sidered, and by unanimous consent agreed to. 

" Resolved, That the Committee on Foreign Relations inquire into the expediency of 
entering into some arrangement with the Government of Great Britain, reciprocal in 
its provisions, for the arrest of fugitives escaping over the Northern or Western 
boundary of the United States, charged with the commission of any crime or crimes, 
and for the surrender of such fugitives upon reasonable requisition to the authorities 
of the State or province from which such fugitives may have fled : Provided, such ar- 
rangements do not comprehend cases of political offences merely, but be restricted to 
those which are in themselves criminal." No action taken. — Senate Journal, 27 Cong. 
2 Sess., 47 ; Cong. Globe, 27 Cong. 2 Sess., 48. 

22. Significant extracts from the Prigg decision. [§25.] 

1842, " Upon this ground we have not the slightest hesitation in holding that, under 
and in virtue of the Constitution, the owner of a slave is clothed with entire authority, 
in every state in the Union, to seize and recapture his slave, whenever he can do it 
without any breach of the peace, or any illegal violence." 

" The clause is found in the national Constitution, and not in that of any state. It 
does not point out any state functionaries, or any state actions to carry its provisions 
into effect. The states cannot, therefore, be compelled to enforce them ; and it might 
well be deemed an unconstitutional exercise of the power of interpretation, to insist 
that the states are bound to provide means to carry into effect the duties of the 



1S21-1S4S.] Prigg Decision. Resolutions. 109 

national government nowhere delegated or intrusted to them by the Constitu- 
tion." 

"If this be so, then it would seem, upon just principles of construction, that the 
legislation of Congress, if constitutional, must supersede all state legislation upon the 
same subject ; and by necessary implication prohibit it." 

" As to the authority so conferred upon state magistrates, while a difference of 
opinion has existed, and may exist still on the point, in different states, whether state 
magistrates are bound to act under it ; none is entertained by this Court that state magis- 
trates may, if they choose, exercise that authority, unless prohibited by state legisla- 
tion." — 16 Peters, Justice Story's Opinion, 608. 

23. Giddings's resolutions on the status of slavea on the high seas. [§ 24.] 
1842, March 21. " Resolved, That when a ship belonging to the citizens of any State 

of this Union leaves the waters and territory of such State, and enters upon the high 
seas, the persons on board cease to be subject to the slave laws of such State, and 
thenceforth are governed in their relations to each other by, and are amenable only 
to, the laws of the United States. 

" Resolved, That when the brig Creole, on her late voyage for New Orleans, left the 
territorial jurisdiction of Virginia, the slave laws of that State ceased to have juris- 
diction over the persons on board said brig, and such persons became amenable only 
to the law of the United States. 

" Resolved, That the persons on board the said ship, in reserving their natural rights 
of personal liberty, violated no law of the United States, incurred no legal penalty, and 
are justly liable to no punishment." — Conf;. Globe, 27 Coiiq: 2 Sess., 324. 

24. Benton's resolution on slaves escaping to Canada. [§ 23.] 
1844, Jan. 29. Mr. Benton presented the following resolution : — 

" Resolved, That the President be requested to communicate to the Senate the infor- 
mation, if any, which may be in the Department of State, in relation to slaves coin- 
mitting crimes and escaping from the United States to the British dominions since the 
ratification of the treaty of 1842, and the refusal of the British authorities to give 
them up. Also, that he communicate to the Senate the information, if any such is 
possessed by him, of the construction which the British government puts upon the said 
article in relation to slaves committing crimes in the United States and taking refuge 
in the British dominions." — Congressional Record, 2S Cong. 1 Sess., 206. 

25. Giddings's resolution for the abolition of the slave trade in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia. [§ 28] 

1848, Jan. 17. Mr. Giddings described the seizure of a colored man employed as 
waiter in a colored boarding-house in Washington. He then offered the following 
resolution : — 

" Resolved, That a select committee of five members be appointed to inquire into and 
report upon facts aforesaid ; also as to the propriety of repealing such acts of Congress 
as sustain or authorize the slave trade in this District, or to remove the seat of the Gov- 
ernment to some free State " Resolution laid on the table. — House Journal, SO Cong. 
1 Sess., 250 ; Cong. Globe, SO Cong. 1 Sess., 179. 

26. Hall's repeal resolution for the District of Columbia. [§ 2S.] 

1848, Feb. 28. Mr. Nathan K. Hall offered the following preamble and resolutions, 
which were read, and, debate arising thereon, it was laid over under the rule, viz. : — 

" Preamble. . . . Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be, and they are here- 
by, directed to report to this House with all convenient speed a bill repealing all laws of 
Congress, and abrogating, so far as they are operative or in force in the District of Co- 
lumbia all the laws in the State of Maryland which authorize or require the courts, 
officers, or magistrates of the United States, or of the said District, within the District of 
Columbia to issue process for arrest, or commit to the jail of the said District any run- 



1 10 Fugitive Slaves : — National Acts. [App. B. 

away or other slave or fugitive from service," etc. Resolution laid over under the rule. 
— House Journal, SO Co7ig. 1 Sess., 450, 453 ; Cong. Globe, 30 Cong. 1 Sess., 390. 

27. Giddings's resolution inquiring into the condition of the District of 
Columbia jail. [§28] 

1848, April 18. Mr. Giddings introduced the following resolution : — 
" Whereas, more than eighty men, women, and children, are said to be now confined in 
the prison of the District of Columbia without being charged with crime or any impro- 
priety other than an attempt to enjoy that liberty for which our fathers encountered 
toil, suffering, and death itself, and for which the people of many European governments 
are now struggling ; And whereas said prison was erected, and is now sustained, by 
funds contributed by the people of the free as well as of the slave States, and is under 
the control of the laws and offtcers of the United States: 

" And whereas, such practice is derogatory to our national character, incompatible 
with the duty of a civilized and Christian people, and unworthy of being sustained by 
an American Congress : Therefore, Be it resolved. That a select committee of five 
members of this body be appointed to inquire into and report to this House by what 
authority said prison is used for the purpose of confining persons who have attempted 
to escape from slavery, with leave to report what legislation is proper in regard to said 
practice. Resolved, further, that said committee be authorized to send for persons and 
papers." Objections being made, the motion was not received. — Co7ig. Globe, SO Cong. 
1 .Sess., 641. 

28. Giddings's resolution on the jail in the District of Columbia, [§ 28.] 

1848, April 21. Mr. Giddings visited the jail in the District of Columbia for the pur- 
pose of interviewing the persons confined there on charge of carrying away slaves from 
this District. He was then mobbed and his life endangered. 

" Resolved, That a committee of five members be appointed to investigate and report 
to this House respecting the points alluded to in the above statement, and that said 
committee be authorized to send for persons and papers, and to sit during the session 
of the House." — Cong. Globe, 30th Cong. 1 Sess., 664. 

29. Meade's resolution on more effectual enforcement of the constitu- 
tional article on fugitive slaves. [§ 27.] 

1849, Jan. 8. Mr. Meade moved that the rules be suspended to enable him to offer 
the following resolution : — 

" Preamble. Whereas it is the duty of the Congress of the United States to enact all 
laws necessary to enforce such provisions of the Constitution as were intended to pro- 
tect the citizens of the several States in their rights of property, and past experience 
has proved that laws should be passed by Congress to enforce the second section of the 
fourth article of the Constitution, which requires that persons held to labor in one State, 
escaping into another, shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such labor 
may be due ; therefore. Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary is hereby in- 
structed to report a bill to this House, providing effectually for the apprehension and 
delivery of fugitives from labor who have escaped, or may hereafter escape, from one 
State into another." Rules not suspended. — House Journal, 30 Cong. 2 Sess., 2\t,; 
Cong. Globe, SO Cong. 2 Sess., 188. 

30. Legislative history of the Fugitive Slave Act. [Jan. 3 to Sept. 18, § 29.] 

1850, Jan. 3. Mr. Mason of Virginia gave notice of his intention to introduce a bill. — 
Cong. Globe, 99. 

Jan. 4 Senate bill No. 23 introduced by Mason, read twice, ordered printed, and 
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. — Senate Journal, 54 ; Globe, 103. 

Jan. 16. Kill reported favorably by Butler from the committee, ordered printed, and 
made a special order for Jan. 23 — Senate Journal, SS ; Globe, 171 ; Senate Reports, I. 
No. 12. 



1S4S-1S50.] Resolutions. Bill of 1850. m 

Jan. 22. Debate bes^un. Mason offered an amendment which made the fine for any 
obstruction of the worl<ings of the act one thousand dollars, and refused to allow the 
testimony of a fugitive. — Globe, 210. 

Jan. 23, 24. Bill taken up and debated. — ^^;w/6' /'"''"^A 104,110; Globe, 220,228; 

Globe App. 79. 83- . , r • 1 u • 

Jan 28. Seward presented an amendment, which allowed the right of trial by jury, 
and punished judges who should disallow the writ of habeas cox'^\x?>. — Senate Journal, 
117; Globe, 233-237. • o ^ 

Jan. 29. Clay introduced, as a part of his compromise resolutions, a declaration that 
a more effective fugitive slave act should be ^2,i,%ft^. — Senate Journal, 118 ; Globe, 247. 

Jan. 31. Mason offered a substitute for the bill already before the Senate. It was 
laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. — Globe, 270. 

June 3. Webster brought in an amendatory h\\\. — Senate Journal, 370 ; Globe, nil. 

Aug. 15. The debate was again opened, and made the special order for Aug. 19 — 
Senate Journal, 560; Globe, 1588. 

Aug. 19. Mason offered as an amendment a substitute for the bill already before the 
^QWdXQ.— Senate Journal, s6j,\ Globe, 160^; Globe App., \$%2. 

Dayton brought in an amendment which gave trial by jury. This was rejected. — ^ 

Senate Journal, 564 ; Globe App., ift^r- ' 

Chase offered one of the same character, which was also rejected. — Globe App ,1589. 

Winthrop brought in an amendment granting the protection of the habeas corpus. 
This was x^i^cl^A. — Senate Journal, 565 ; Globe App., 1589. 

Aug. 20. Mason's substitute was agreed to.— Senate Journal, 568; Globe, 1616; 

Globe App., 1591. 

An amendment to Mason's substitute was offered by Mr. Pratt. This gave the owner 
the right of suit against the United States for the value of the slave if not delivered. 
This was afterward amended by Mason and Pratt, and rejected, August 2^,. — Senate 
Journal, 570-573; Globe, 1636; Globe App., 1609. 

Aug 22. Underwood offered an amendment as a substitute, and Davis presented an 
amendment to Mason's bill striking out the clause providing compensation for escaped 
slaves. This was rejected. - ^-^/w/.' >«'-'''^''. 573. SSo; Globe, 1636; Globe App., 1609, 

1619. -i r-\, A 

Aug. 23. Amendments were offered to Underwood's amendment by Chase and 
Badger. Both were rejected. — Senate Journal, 575-58° ! <^^obe App., 1619, 1623, 1625. 
Another slight amendment by Chase was also rejected. — G^/c^/^^ App., 1624. 
Mason amended his bill by making the Marshal liable for the value of a slave who 
has escaped from his cvi?,\.od,^r. — Senate Journal, 576 ; Globe App., 1625. 

An attempt to amend the bill by striking out the compensation for escaped slaves, 
and other slight changes, was made by Davis, and the amendment was accepted. - 
Senate Journal, ^%o; Globe App., i^io. 

Bill as amended was then ordered to be engrossed for the third reading. — .S^,7<7/^ 
Journal, 581 ; Globe, 1647 ; Globe App., 1630. 

Aug. 26. After changing the title to make it an act supplementary to that of 1793. 
the bill was passed, and sent to the Y^o\x?>&.— Senate Journal, 5S3 ; Globe, 1660. 

Sept 12. In the House it was read a first and second time by title. Thompson of 
Pennsylvania moved to put it on its passage, and moved the previous question, which 
he refused to withdraw, and which was carried — House Journal, 12S9, 1448. 

Stevens moved to lay it on the table, but the motion was lost, and the bill was 
ordered to a third rG.2idi\ng.— House Journal, 1449. 

The bill was passed, 109 to 75. — House Journal, 1451-1453; C'/c'/v, 1S07. 
It was returned to the Sen:ite. — Senate Journal, 627 ; Globe, iSio. 
Sept 14. The bill was signed by the presiding officer of the Senate. — Senate Journal, 
629; Globe, 1S15. 



112 Fugitive Slaves : — National Acts. [App. b. 

Bill signed by the Speaker of the House. — Hmise Jourtial, 1457 ; Globe, 1812. 
Sept. 16. Bill sent to the President, and signed by him Sept. 18. — Hcuse Journal, 
1472, 1497 ; Senate Journal, 638, 648. 

31. Second Fugitive Slave Act. [§§ 29, 30.] 
1850, Sept. 18. ''An Act to amend, and supplementary to, the Act entitled 'An Act 
respecting Fugitives Jroni Justice, and Persons escaping from the Service of their 
Masters,^ approved February twelfth, one thousand seven hundred and itinety-three. 

" Be it ejiacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America 
in Congress assembled. That the persons who have been, or may hereafter be, appointed 
commissioners, in virtue of any act of Congress, by the Circuit Courts of the United 
States, and who, in consequence of such appointment, are authorized to exercise the 
powers that any justice of the peace, or other magistrate of any of the United States, 
may exercise in respect to offenders for any crime or offence against the United States, 
by arresting, imprisoning, or bailing the same under and by virtue of the thirty-third 
section of the act of the twenty-fourth of September seventeen hundred and eighty- 
nine, entitled 'An Act to establish the judicial courts of the United States,' shall be, 
and are hereby, authorized and required to exercise and discharge all the powers and 
duties conferred by this act. 

" S£c. 2. A)ui be it further enacted, That the Superior Court of each organized Ter- 
ritory of the United States shall have the same power to appoint commissioners to tatce 
acknowledgments of bail and affidavits, and to take depositions of witnesses in civil 
causes, which is now possessed by the Circuit Court of the United States ; and all com- 
missioners who shall hereafter be appointed for such purposes by the Superior Court 
of any organized Territory of the United States, shall possess all the powers, and exer- 
cise all the duties, conferred by law upon the commissioners appointed by the Circuit 
Courts of the United States for similar purposes, and shall moreover exercise and dis- 
charge all the powers and duties conferred by this act. 

" Sec. 3. And be it further enacted. That the Circuit Courts of the United States, 
and the Superior Courts of each organized Territory of the United States, shall from 
time to time enlarge the number of commissioners, with a view to afford reasonable 
facilities to reclaim fugitives from labor, and to the prompt discharge of the duties 
imposed by this act. 

" Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the commissioners above named shall have 
concurrent jurisdiction with the judges of the Circuit and District Courts of the United 
States, in their respective circuits and districts within the several States, and the judges 
of the Superior Courts of the Territories, severally and collectively, in term-time and 
vacation ; and shall grant certificates to such claimants, upon satisfactory proof being 
made, with authority to take and remove such fugitives from service or labor, under the 
restrictions herein contained, to the State or Territory from which such persons may 
have escaped or fled. 

" Sec. 5. And be it further enacted. That it shall be the duty of all marshals and 
deputy marshals to obey and execute all warrants and precepts issued under the jno- 
visions of this act, when to them directed; and should any marshal or deputy marshal 
refuse to receive such warrant, or other process, when tendered, or to use all proper, 
means diligently to execute the same, he shall, on conviction thereof, be fined in the 
sum of one thousand dollars, to the use of such claimant, on the motion of such claim- 
ant bv the Circuit or District Court for the district of such marshal ; and after arrest 
of such fugitive, by such marshal or his deputy, or whilst at any time in his custody 
under the provisions of this act, should such fugitive escape, whether with or without 
the assent of such marshal or his deputy, such marshal shall be liable, on his official 
bond, to be prosecuted for the benefit of such claimant, for the full value of the service 
or labor of said fugitive in the State, Territory, or District whence he escaped: and the 



1850.] Second Fugitive Slave Act. 1 13 

better to enable the said commissioners, when thus appointed, to execute their duties 
faithfully and efficiently, in conformity with the requirements of the Constitution of the 
United States and of this act, they are hereby authorized and empowered, within their 
counties respectively, to appoint, in writing under their hands, any one or more suit- 
able persons, from time to time, to execute all such warrants and other process as may 
be issued by them in the lawful performance of their respective duties ; with authority 
to such commissioners, or the persons to be appointed by thevn, to execute process as 
aforesaid, to summon and call to their aid the bystanders, or posse coDiitatus of the 
proper county, when necessary to insure a faithful observance of the clause of the Con- 
stitution referred to, in conformity with the provisions of this act; and all good citizens 
are hereby commanded to aid and assist in the prompt and efficient execution of this 
law, whenever their services may be required, as aforesaid, for that purpose ; and said 
warrants shall run, and be executed by said officers, anywhere in the State within which 
they are issued. 

" Sec. 6. And he it further enacted, That when a person held to service or labor in 
any State or Territory of the United States, has heretofore or shall hereafter escape into 
another State or Territory of the United States, the person or persons to whom such 
service or labor may be due, or his, her, or their agent or attorney, duly authorized, by 
power of attorney, in writing, acknowledged and certified under the seal of some legal 
officer or court of the State or Territory in which the same may be executed, may pursue 
and reclaim such fugitive person, either by procuring a warrant from some one of the 
courts , judges, or commissioners aforesaid, of the proper circuit, district, or county, 
for the apprehension of such fugitive from service or labor, or by seizing and arresting 
such fugitive, where the same can be done without process, and by taking, or causing 
such person to he taken, forthwith before such court, judge, or commissioner, whose 
duty it shall be to hear and determine the case of such claimant in a summary manner ;. 
and upon satisfactory proof being made, by deposition or affidavit, in writing, to be 
taken and certified by such court, judge, or commissioner, or by other satisfactory testi- 
mony, duly taken and certified by some court, magistrate, justice of the peace, or other 
lesjal officer authorized to administer an oath and take depositions under the laws of 
the State or Territory from which such person owing service or labor may have escaped, 
with a certificate of such magistracy or other authority, as aforesaid, with the seal of the 
proper court or officer thereto attached, which seal shall be sufficient to establish the 
competency of the proof, and with proof, also by affidavit, of the identity of the person 
whose service or labor is claimed to be due as aforesaid, that the person so arrested 
does in fact owe service or labor to the person or persons claiming him or her, in the 
State or Territory from which such fugitive may have escaped as aforesaid, and that said 
person escaped, to make out and deliver to such claimant, his or her agent or attorney, 
a certificate setting forth the substantial facts as to the service or labor due from such 
fugitive to the claimant, and of his or her escape from the State or Territory in which 
such service or labor was due, to the State or Territory in which he or she was arrested, 
with authority to such claimant, or his or her agent or attorney, to use such reasonable 
force and restraint as may be necessary, under the circumstances of the case, to take 
and remove such fugitive person back to the State or Territory whence he or she may 
have escaped as aforesaid. In no trial or hearing under this act shall the testimony of 
such alleged fugitive be admitted in evidence ; and the certificates in this and the first 
[fourth] section mentioned, shall be conclusive of the right of the person or persons in 
whose favor granted, to remove such fugitive to the State or Territory from which he 
escaped, and shall prevent all molestation of such person or persons by any process 
issued by any court, judge, magistrate, or other person whomsoever. 

"Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That any person who shall knowingly and will- 
ingly obstruct, hinder, or prevent such claimant, his agent or attorney, or any person or 



114 Fugitive Slaves : — National Acts. [app. B. 

persons lawfully assisting him, her, or them, from arresting such a fugitive from service 
or labor, either with or without process as aforesaid, or shall rescue, or attempt to 
rescue, such fugitive from service or labor, from the custody of such claimant, his or 
her agent or attorney, or other person or persons lawfully assisting as aforesaid, when 
so arrested, pursuant to the authority herein given and declared; or shall aid, abet, or 
assist such person so owing service or labor as aforesaid, directly or indirectly, to 
escape from such claimant, his agent or attorney, or other person or persons legally 
authorized as aforesaid ; or shall harbor or conceal such fugitive, so as to prevent the 
discovery and arrest of such person, after notice or knowledge of the fact that such 
person was a fugitive from service or labor as aforesaid, shall, for either of said offences, 
be subject to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceed- 
ing six months, by indictment and conviction before the District Court of the United 
States for the district in which such offence may have been committed, or before the 
proper court of criminal jurisdiction, if committed within any one of the organized 
Territories of the United States ; and shall moreover forfeit and pay, by way of civil 
damages to the party injured by such illegal conduct, the sum of one thousand dollars, 
for each fugitive so lost as aforesaid, to be recovered by action of debt, in any of the 
District ov Territorial Courts aforesaid, within whose jurisdiction the said offence may 
have been committed. 

" Sec. 8. And be it further enacted. That the marshals, their deputies, and the clerks 
of the said District and Territorial Courts, shall be paid, for their services, the like fees 
as may be allowed to them for similar services in other cases; and where such services 
a.re rendered exclusively in the arrest, custody, and delivery of the fugitive to the 
claimant, his or her agent or attorney, or where such supposed fugitive may be dis- 
charged out of custody for the want of sufificient proof as aforesaid, then such fees are 
to be paid in the whole by such claimant, his agent or attorney; and in all cases where 
the proceedings are before a commissioner, he shall be entitled to a fee of ten dollars 
in full for his services in each case, upon the delivery of the said certificate to the 
claimant, bis or her agent or attorney ; or a fee of five dollars in cases where the proof 
shall not, in the opinion of such commissioner, warrant such certificate and delivery, 
inclusive of all services incident to such arrest and examination, to be paid, in either 
case, by the claimant, his or her agent or attorney. The person or persons authorized 
to execute the process to be issued by such commissioners for the arrest and detention 
of fugitives from service or labor as aforesaid, shall also be entitled to a fee of five 
dollars each for each person he or they may arrest and take before any such commis- 
sioner as aforesaid, at the instance and request of such claimant, with such other fees 
as may be deemed reasonable by such commissioner for such other additional services 
as maybe necessarily performed by him or them ; such as attending at the examination, 
keeping the fugitive in custody, and providing him with food and lodging during his 
detention, and until the final determination of such commissioner ; and, in general, for 
performing such other duties as may be required by such claimant, his or her attorney 
or agent, or commissioner in the premises, such fees to be made up in conformity with 
the fees usually charged by the officers of the courts of justice within the proper dis- 
trict or county, as near as may be practicable, and paid by such claimants, their agents 
or attorneys, whether such supposed fugitives from service or labor be ordered to be 
delivered to such claimants by the final determination of such commissioners or not. 

" Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, That, upon affidavit made by the claimant of 
such fugitive, his agent or attorney, after such certificate has been issued, that he has 
reason to apprehend that such fugitive will be rescued by force from his or their pos- 
session before he can be taken beyond the limits of the State in which the arrest is 
made, it shall be the duty of the officer making the arrest to retain such fugitive in his 
custody, and to remove him to the State whence he fled, and there to deliver him to 



1850-1S51.] Act of 1850. Resolutions. 115 

said claimant, his agent, or attorney. And to this end, the officer aforesaid is hereby 
authorized and required to employ so many persons as he may deem necessary to over- 
come such force, and to retain them in his service so long as circumstances may require. 
The said officer and his assistants, while so employed, to receive the same compensa- 
tion, and to be allowed the same expenses, as are now allowed by law for transpor- 
tation of criminals, to be certified by tlie judge of the district within which the arresi 
is made, and paid out of the treasury of the United States. 

" Sec. 10. And be it further enacted. That when any person held to service or labor 
in any State or Territory, or in the District of Columbia, shall escape therefrom, the 
party to whom such service or labor shall be due, his, her, or their agent or attorney, 
may apply to any court of record therein, or judge thereof in vacation, and make satis- 
factory proof to such court, or judge in vacation, of the escape aforesaid, and that the 
person escaping owed service or labor to such party. Whereupon the court shall cause 
a record to be made of the matters so pi'oved, and also a general description of the 
person so escaping, with such convenient certainty as may be ; and a transcript of such 
record, authenticated by the attestation of the clerk and of the seal of the said court, 
being produced in any other State, Territory, or district in which the person so escap- 
ing may be found, and being exhibited to any judge, commissioner, or other officer 
authorized by the law of the United States to cause persons escaping from service or 
labor to be delivered up, shall be held and taken to be full and conclusive evidence of 
the fact of escape, and that the service or labor of the person escaping is due to the 
party in such record mentioned. And upon the production by the said party of other and 
further evidence if necessary, either oral or by affidavit, in addition to what is contained 
5n the said record of the identity of the person escaping, he or she shall be delivered 
up to the claimant. And the said court, commissioner, judge, or other person author- 
ized by this act to grant certificates to claimants of fugitives, shall, upon the production 
of the record and other evidences aforesaid, grant to such claimant a certificate of his 
right to take any such person identified and proved to be owing service or labor as 
aforesaid, which certificate shall authorize such claimant to seize or arrest and trans- 
port such person to the State or Territory from which he escaped : Prmided, That 
nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring the production of a transcript 
of such record as evidence as aforesaid. But in its absence the claim shall be heard 
and determined upon other satisfactory proofs, competent in law. 

"Approved, September i8, \%zpP — Statutes at Lars;e, ix. 462-465. 

32. McLanahan's resolution against repeal of the law of 1850. 

1851, Jan. 13. Mr. McLanahan moved that the rules be suspended to enable him 
to introduce the following resolution, viz. . " Resolved, That it would be inexpedient and 
improper to repeal the law passed at the last session of Congress, entitled 'An act to 
amend, and supplementary to, the act entitled An act respecting fugitives from justice 
and persons escaping from the service of their masters,' approved Feb. 12, 1793." House 
refused to suspend the rules. — House Journal, SI Cong. 2 Scss., 139 ; Cong. Globe, 31 Cong. 
2 Sess., 226. 

33. Clay's resolution on the Shadrach case, Boston. [§ 51.] 

1851, Feb. 17. Mr. Clay submitted the following resolution, which lies over one day: 
" Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to lay before the 
Senate, if not incompatible with the public interest, any information he may possess in 
regard to an alleged recent case of a forcible resistance to the execution of the laws of 
the United States in the city of Boston, and to communicate to the Senate under the 
above condition what means he has adopted to meet the occurrence, and whether, in 
his opinion, any additional legislation is necessary to meet the exigency of the case, and 
to more rigorously execute existing laws." Resolution 2LAo^\.&di..— Senate Journal, SI 
Cong. 2 Sess., 187 ; Cong. Globe, SI Cong. 2 Sess., 580. 



ii6 Fugitive Slaves: — National Acts. [App. B. 

34. Bright's bill explanatory of law of 1850. 

1851, Feb. 10. Mr. Bright obtained leave to bring in a bill (45S) explanatory of 
the act approved iSth September in the year 1850, entitled, "An Act to amend, and 
supplemental to, the act entitled, ' An Act respecting fugitives from justice and persons 
escaping from the service of their masters,'" approved Feb. 12, 1793, which was read 
twice, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. — Senate Journal, 32 Cong. 
1 Sess., 162. 

The bill is in the following terms: ^^ Be it enacted, etc., that all action and causes 
of action, and all proceedings instituted and to be instituted, for any violation of the 
provisions of said act respecting fugitives from justice and persons escaping from the 
service of their masters, approved the 12th February, 1793, may be instituted and 
prosecuted to final judgment and execution as if the said act of Sept. 18, 1850, had 
not been passed." — Con<^. Globe, 31 Cong. 2 Scss., 492. 

35. Fitch's resolution affirming the Compromise. 

1852, March i. Mr. Fitch offered the following resolution: "Resolved, That we rec- 
ognize the binding efficacy of the compromises of the Constitution, and believe it to 
be the intention of the people generally, as we hereby declare it to be ours individually, 
to abide such compromises, and to sustain the laws necessary to carry out the pro- 
visions for the delivery of fugitive slaves ordered, and that we deprecate all further 
agitation of questions growing out of that provision of the Constitution embraced in 
the acts of the last Congress known as the Compromise." — House Journal, 32 Cong. 
1 Sess., 408 ; Cong. Globe, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 659. 

36. Jackson's resolution affirming the Compromise. 

1852, March 22. ^^ Resolved, That we recognize the binding efficacy of the compro- 
mises of the Constitution, and believe it to be the intention of the people generally, as 
we hereby declare it to be ours individually, to abide such compromises, and to sustain 
the laws necessary to carry them out, — the provision for the delivery of fugitive slaves, 
and the act of the last Congress for that purpose included, — and that we deprecate all 
further agitation of questions growing out of that provision, of the questions embraced 
in the acts of the last Congress known as the Compromise, and of questions generally 
connected with the institution of slavery as unnecessary, useless, and dangerous." 
Resolution, as amended by Mr. Hillyer below, agreed to. — House Journal, 32 Cong. 
1 Sess., 550 ; Cong. Globe, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 825. 

37. Hillyer's finality resolution. 

1852, Aprils. Mr. Hillyer moved the following resolution: "Resolved, That the 
series of acts passed during the first session of the Thirty-first Congress, known as 
the compromise, are recorded as a final adjustment, and a permanent settlement of the 
questions there embraced, and should be maintained and executed as such." Resolu- 
tion agreed to, April 6, 1852. — House Journal, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 548; Cong. Globe, 32 
Cong. 1 Sess., gyg. 

38. Chase's resolution of inquiry into payments under act of 1850. 

1852, June 3. Mr. Chase submitted the following resolution: "Resolved, That the 
Secretary of the Interior be directed to communicate to the Senate statements, showing 
in detail the expenses incurred and claims made under the Act to amend and supple- 
mental to the ' Act respecting fugitives from justice and persons escaping from the 
service of their masters,' distinguishing the expenses incurred and claimed by reason 
of prosecutions for treasons, alleged to have been committed in resistance of said act 
from expenses incurred and claimed by reason of other prosecutions for offending 
against said act, and for proceedings before and under orders made by committee." 
No action taken. — Senate Journal, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 450; Cong. Globe, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 
1519- 



APPENDIX C. 

NATIONAL ACTS AND PROPOSITIONS RELATING TO 
FUGITIVE SLAVES. 

(1S60-1S64.) 

This Appendix is intended to contain references to all the resolutions, bills, and acts 
of Congress, relative to fugitives, from the beginning of the critical session of iS6o-6i 
to the repeal of the acts in 1S64. The resolutions for amendments to the Constitu- 
tion have been collected by Mr. Herman V. Ames of the Harvard Graduate School, 
who has kindly selected out of the numerous amendments proposed in the last session 
of the Thirty-Sixth Congress those bearing upon this subject. 

The shigle star (*) indicates a measure which passed one House : a double star (**) 
a measure which passed both Houses. 

1. President Buchanan's message. [ § 86.] 

i860, Dec. 4. Paragraph on the return of fugitive slaves : Senate yournal, 36 Cong. 
2 Sess., 18. 

2. Cochrane's Joint Resolution. [ § 86] 

i860, Dec. 12. To amend the Constitution, for the return of fugitives : Honse Jonr- 
nal, 30 Co)ig. 2 Scss., 61 ; Cong. Globe, 77. 

3. Morris's Resolution. [ § 86.] 

i85o, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law: House Joitrnal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess. 
(i})\ Cong. Globe, 77. 

4. Leake's Joint Resolution. [ § 86] 

i860, Dec. 12. Amendment to the Constitution: House yo!irnal,36 Co7tg. 2 Sess., 
65; Cong. Globe,"]-]. 

5. Cox's Resolution. [ § 8S.] 

i85o, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law: Senate Jonrnal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 

66 ; Cong. Globe, 77. 

6. Stevenson's Resolution. [ § 86 ] 

i860, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law : House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 

67 ; Cong. Globe, 77. 

7. Niblack's Resolution. [ § 86] 

i860, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law : House Jountal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 
69 ; Cong. Globe, 77. 

8. English's Joint Resolution. [§86] 

i860, Dec. 12. Amendment to the Constitution on the return of fugitives : House 
Jonrnal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 68 ; Cong. Globe, 78. 

9. MoClernand's Joint Resolution. [ § 86. | 

i860, Dec. 12. Amendment to the Constitution, on fugitive slaves : House Jonrnal, 
So Cong. 3 Sess., 68 ; Cong. Globe, 78. 

10. Hindman's Joint Resolution. [ § 86] 

i860, Dec. 12. Amendment to the Constitution for the enforcement of the Fugitive 
Slave Law : House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 70; Cong. Globe, 79. 

[117] 



Ii8 Fugitive Slaves: — Acts Repealed. [App. c. 

11. Kilgore's Resolution. [ § 86 ] 

i860, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law : House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 
70 ; Cong Globe, 78. 

12. Johnson's Joint Resolution. [ § 86.] 

i860, Dec. 13. Amendment to the Constitution for the return of fugitive slaves : 
Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 41 ; Cong. Globe, 83. 

13. Crittenden's Joint Resolution. [ § 86.] 

i860, Dec. 18. Amendment to the Constitution for payment for fugitive slaves : 
Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 114. 

14. Douglas's Joint Resolution. [ § 8S.] 

i860, Dec. 24. Amendment to the Constitution for payment for fugitive slaves : 
Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 61 ; Cong. Globe, 1S3. 

15. Florence's Joint Resolution. 

1861, Jan. 15. Amendment to the Constitution for payment- for fugitive slaves: 
Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 378. 

16. Morris's Joint Resolution. 

1861, Jan. 23. Amendment to the Constitution on the return of fugitive slaves: 
Cong. 'Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 527. 

17. Douglas's Bill to amend the Fugitive Slave Laws. [ § 101. j 
1861, Jan. 28. Introduced : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 586. 

18. Florence's Joint Resolution. 

1861, Jan. 28. Amendment to the Constitution against the obstruction of the Fugi- 
tive Slave Law by States : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 598. 

19. Kellogg's Joint Resolution. 

1861, Feb. I. Amendment to the Constitution on the power of Congress over fugi- 
tive slaves : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 690. 

20. Kellogg's Joint Resolution. 

i86r, Feb. 26. Same as above: Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess , 1243. 

21. Kellogg's Joint Resolution. 

1861, Feb. 27. Similar to above : House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 410; Cong. Globe, 
1259. 

22. Peace Convention Amendment to the Constitution. [ § 85.] 

1861, Feb. 27. Reported by select committee : Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., ^Z-, 
637 , Cong. Globe, 1254. 

23. Clarence's Joint Resolution. 

1861, Feb. 27. Amendment to the Constitution for payment for fugitive slaves ; 
Cong. Globe, 36 Cong 2 Sess., 1260. 

24. Crittenden's Joint Resolution. 

1861, Feb. 28. Amendment to the Constitution on the power of the States over 
fugitive slaves, etc. : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1270. 

* 25. Compromise Bill to amend the Fugitive Slave Act. [ § 87.] 
1861, Mar. I. IJill reported by the select committee of thirty-three for the amend- 
ment of the act for the rendition of fugitives from labor : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 

1327. Mar. I. Vallandigham's amendment to the above : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 

2 Sess., 132S. Mar. i. Bill passed the House : Co7tg. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1327, 

1328. Mar. 2. r.ill read in the Senate . Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1350. 

26. Pugh's Joint Resolution. 

1861, Mar. 2. Amendment to the Constitution on the return of fugitive slaves; 
Senate Journal, 36 Cong 2 Sess., 37S ; Con^- Globe, 1368. 

27. Johnson's Joint Resolution on the return of fugitives. 

1861, Mar. 2. Amendment to the Constitution: Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 
382; Cong. Globe, 1401. 



iS6o-iS6i.] 



Resolutions and Bills. HQ 



28 Powell's Joint Resolution on the return of fugitive slaves. 

i85i, Mar. 2. Amendment to the Constitution • S.naU Journal, 3U Cong. 2 Sess., 

^^29.^Lovejoy's Resolution against the return of fugitives by the Army. 

^ Ise'ii' July 9. Introduced : //ous, Joitrnal, 37 Cong. 1 Scss., 653 ; Cong. Globe, 32. 

30 Trumbull's confiscation Bill. [ § 90] 

1861, July 15. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong 1 Scss., 42 ; Cong Globe, 120. 

* * 31 Chandler's confiscation Act. [ § 90.] 

1861 July 15. Introduced Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., ^^^ Cong. Globe, 120. 

July 22. Trumbull's amendment : Senate Jourttal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., 70 ; Cong 

Globe -18 July 22. Passed the Senate (yeas and nays not given) : Senate Journal, 

37 Cong. 1 Sess., 71 ; Cong Globe, 219. July 23- Senate bill introduced into the 

House and referred- House Journal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., 136; Cong Gjobe, 231- -— 
Aug. 2. Reported with amendment in the House: House Journal, 37 Cong 1 Sess., 

197 ; Cong. Globe, 409. Aug. 3. Committee amendments : House Journal. 37 Cong. 

1 Sess., 232; Cong Globe, 431. Aug 3. Passed the House (yeas 60, nays 4S) : 

House journal, 37 Cong 1 Sess., 235 ; Cong. Globe, 431. Aug 5- Passed the Senate 

as amended in the House ; Senate Journal, 37 Cong 1 Sess., 178 ; Cong. Globe, 434- - 
Aug. 6. Bill signed by the President- Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., 195; Cong. 
Globe, 454- 

32. Wilson's Joint Resolution for discharge of fugitives from the 
Washington jail. [ § 97.] 

1861, Dec. 4. Introduced and referred: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 24; Cong. 

Globe, 12. , T^. .. • .. 

« 33. Wilson's Resolution on repeal of the black code m the District 

of Columbia. [§97] 

i85i, Dec. 4. Introduced and agreed to : Senate Journal, 37 Cong 2 Sess., 22 ; Long. 

Globe, 12. 

* 34. Clarke's Resolution on persons in Washington jail. 

1861, Dec. 4. Introduced and agreed to : Senate Journal, 37 Cong 2 Sess., 22 ; Cong. 

Globe, 12. 
35, Lovejoy's Bill to prevent return by the Army. [ § 95 ] 
1861, Dec. 4. Introduced: House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 16, Cong. Globe, 34. 

* 36^ Sumner's Resolution on Army orders relating to fugitive slaves. 
1861, Dec. 4. Introduced and agreed to : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 19; Cong. 

Globe, 9. 
37. Trumbull's Confiscation Bill. 

1861, Dec 5. Introduced and read twice: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 27; 

Cong. Globe, 10. 
*38. Fessenden's Resolution on the Washington jail. [§97.] 

1861, Dec. 9. Introduced : House Journal, 37 Cong 2 Sess., 54; Cong. Globe, 36. 

Dec. 9. Aldrich's amendment: Cong Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 36. Dec 9. Love- 
joy's amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 36. Dec. 9. Passed as amended : 

Cong Globe, 37 Cong., 2 Sess., 36. 
39. Bingham's Resolution on the Washington jail. [ § 97.] 
1861, Dec. 9. Introduced and referred : House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 52 ; Cong. 

Globe, 35. 

40 Morrill's confiscation Joint Resolution. [ § 91.] 

1861. Dec II. Introduced and referred: Semite Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 36; 
Cong. Globe, 49. 



120 Fugitive Slaves: — Aets Repealed. [App. c. 

*41. Hale's Resolution on the slaves of rebels. [ § 95.] 

1861, Dec. 16. Introduced and agreed to : Sctiate Journal, 37 Cong. S Sess., 45 ; 
Cong. Globe, 88. 

42. Wilson's Bill for emancipation in the District of Columbia. [ § 98. ] 

1861, Dec 16. Introduced and read twice: Senate Joii)-nal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess, 47; 

Cong. Globe, 89 Dec. 19. Referred: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 153. [See 

No. 54.]. 

*43. Sumner's Resolution against the surrender of fugitives by the 
Army. [ § 95.] 

1861, Dec. 18. Introduced and agreed to: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 130 ; 
Cong. Globe, 130. 

44. Lovejoy's confiscation and emancipation Resolution. [ §§ 91, 95.] 

1861, Dec. 20. Introduced and laid on the table : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 
106; Cong. Globe, 158. 

*45. Julian's Resolution to amend the Fugitive Slave Law. [ § 95.] 

1861, Dec 20. Introduced and adopted: House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., iot,; Conq: 
Globe, 1 58. 

46. Shank's Resolution on the return of fugitives by the Army. 
[§95] 

1861, Dec. 20. Introduced and referred : House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 102, 124 ; 
Cong. Globe, 158, 172. 

*47. Wilson's Resolution for articles of war. [§95.] 

1861, Dec. 20. Introduced: House journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 103; Cong. Globe, 158. 

Dec. 23. Adopted : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109, 114; Cong. Globe, 159, 

16S. 

48. Wilson's Bill on the arrest of fugitives by the officers of the Army 
and Navy. [ § 95.] 

1861, Dec. 23. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 167 ; Cong. Globe, 161, 

209. 1862, Jan. 7. Committee Amendments : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 88 ; 

Cong. Globe, 207. [ See No. 53.] 

49. Howe's Bill for repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. [ § 101] 
1861, Dec. 26. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 74; Cong. Globe, 177. 

50. Davis's confiscation Bill. 

1861, Dec. 30. Introduced and referred : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 75 ; Cong. 
Globe, 1 78. 

**51. Grimes's Act on criminal justice in the District of Columbia 
[ § 97.] 

1861, Dec. 30. Introduced: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 75; Cong. Globe, 182. 
1862, Jan. 6. Reported: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 199. Jan. 10. Com- 
mittee amendments : Senate Jou7-nal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 98 ; Cong. Globe, 264. Jan. 10 

Powell's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 98, 109 ; Cong. Globe, 264, 319. 

Jan. 14. Pearce's two amendments: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109; Cong 

Globe, 319. Jan. 14. Ten Eyck's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109 , 

Cong. Globe, 320. Jan. 14. Harlan's amendment. Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 

320. Jan. 14. Clark's amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2,-0. Jan 14 

Saulsbury's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109; Cong. Globe, 320. 

Jan. 14. Clark's amendment: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 321. Jan. 14. Passed 

the Senate (yeas 31, nays 4) : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109; Co7tg. Globe, 321. 

52. Trumbull's Bill for the confiscation of property of rebels and to free 
the slaves of rebels. [ § 91] 

1862, Jan. 15. Reported from the Senate Committee on Judiciary : Senate Journal, 
37 Cong. 2 Sess., 113 ; Co7tg. Globe, 334. [See No. 57.] 



i86i-iS62.] Resolutions and Bills. 12 1 

53 Amendments to Wilson's Bill on Army and Navy officers [ §95.] 
1862, Jan i5. [See No. 48.J Collamer's amendment ; Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 

Sess., ii6; Cong Globe, t,^%. Jan. i6. Saulsbury's amendment : Senate Journal, S7 

Cong. 2 Sess , ii6; Cong. Globe, 358. Jan. 16. Rice's amendment to Saulsbury's 

amendment : Cong Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 359. 
54. Wilson's District of Columbia Bill. [§98] 
1862, Feb. 12. [See No. 41 ] Reported: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 7S5. 

* 55. Wilson's Resolution on the management of the Washington jail. 
1862, Feb 18. Introduced and agreed to; Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., iij ; 

Cona-. Globe, 861. 

56. Wilson's Bill to repeal the black code in the District of Columbia. 
[ § 98.] 

1862, Feb. 24. Introduced and referred : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess , 263 ; Cong, 
Globe, 917. 

57. Amendments to the confiscation Bill. [ § 91.] 

1862, Feb. 25. [See No. 52.] Trumbull's amendment : Senate Jour7ial, 37 Cong. 2 

Sess., 239 ; Cong. Globe, 942. Feb. 25. Sumner's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 

Cong. 2 Sess., 239 ; Cong. Globe, 946. Feb. 27. Davis's substitute : Cong. Globe, 37 

Cong. 2 Sess., 986. [See No. 59.] 

* *58. Blair's Act prohibiting return by the Army. [ § 95.] 

1862, Feb. 25. Introduced; Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 3 58; Cong. Globe, 955. 

Feb 25. Bingham's amendment . House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 358 ; Cong. 

Globe, 955. Feb. 25. Passed the House (yeas 95, nays 51): House Journal, 37 

Cong. 2 Sess., 265; Cong. Globe, 958. Mar. 10. In the Senate; Davis's amend- 

meiit. Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess.,i%^; Cong. Globe, 1 142. Mar. 10. Sauls- 
bury's amendment- Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 284; Cong. Globe, 1142. 

Mar. 10. MacDougall's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 284 , Cong. 

Globe, 1 142. Mar. 10. Saulsbury's amendment: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 

2S4; Cong. Globe 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1142. Mar 10. Passed the Senate (yeas 29, nays 

9). Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 285; Cong. Globe, 1142. Mar. 14. Approved 

by the President : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1243. 

59. Harris's confiscation Bill. [ § 91 ] 

1862, Mar. 14. Introduced and referred : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 304 ; 
Coni^ Globe, 1228. [See No. 63.] 

60. Report of House Judiciary Committee on confiscation. 

1862, Mar. 30 Adverse to all bills referred by the House . Con^. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 
Sess., 1303. [See No. 64 ] 

61. "Wilson's Resolution on the return of fugitives by the Army and 
Navy. 

1862, Apr. 3. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 361 , Cong. Globe, 1546. 
[See No. 70. | 

* 62. Bill for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. 
[§98.1 

1862, Apr. 3. Passed the Senate : Cong Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess.. 1648. [See No. 65 ] 

63. Sherman's Amendment to Harris's confiscation Bill. 

1862, Apr. ID. [See No. 59] Introduced ■ Cono: Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1652. 
[See No. 67.] 

64. Wilson's Bill to amend the Fugitive Slave Act. [ § 101 ] 

1862, Apr. II. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 385; Cong. Globe, 

1624 Apr. 14. Harris's amendment; Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1652. 

Apr. 14. Grimes's amendment . Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess , 393, 439 ; Cong. Globe, 
1692. 



122 Fugitive Slaves: — Acts Repealed. [App. c. 

* 65. Bill for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. 1 § 98] 
1862, Apr. 16. [See No. 62.] Passed the House : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 

16S6. Approved by the President. 
6G. Lovejoy's Bill on return of fugitives by the Army. [ §95.) 
1862, Apr. 16. Reported adversely from the Committee on Judiciary in the House : 

Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 16S2. 

67. Harris's confiscation Bill. | § 91.] 

1862, Apr. 16. [See No. 63. J Reported from the Senate Committee on Judiciary : 

Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 400 ; Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 167S. Apr. 22. 

Walton's amendment: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 177 1. Apr. 22. Porter's 

amendment; Senate yournal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 703; Cong. Globe, 1767, 1772. 

Apr. 22. Bingham's amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., i'jGt- Apr. 22. Col. 

lamer's amendment: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1782, 1895. Apr. 24. Motion 

to recommit: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 434; Cong. Globe, 1S56, 18S6. [See 
No. 71.] 

68. House confiscation Bill. [ § 91 ] 

1862, Apr. 23. A Select Committee raised in the House ■ Hoiise Journal, 37 Cong. 
2 Sess., 602; Cong. Globe, 1788, 1S20. 

69. Eliot's confiscation and emancipation Bill. [ § 91] 

1862, Apr. 30. Introduced: House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 625; Cong. Globe, 
1S86. [See No. 73.] 

70. Saulsbury's amendment of "Wilson's Resolution. 

1862, May I. [See No. 61. j Introduced: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., <\2i9 > 
Co/tg. Globe, 1S94. 

71. Harris's confiscation Bill recommitted. [ § 91.] 

1862, May 6. [See No. 67.] Wilson's amendment uf Collamer's amendment : Senate 

Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 450 ; Cong. Globe, 1954. May 6. Final vote : Senate 

Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 450; Cong Globe, 1954, 1965. 

72. Clark's confiscation Bill. 1§91.| 

1862, May 14. Reported: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 476; Cong. Globe, 21 12. 

May 14. Discussed but not acted upon : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong 2 Sess., 2163, 21SS, 

2219, 2S42. 

73. Confiscation and emancipation Bill. [ § 91] 

1862, May 14. [See No. 69] Reported in the House. House yournal, 37 Cong. 2 
Sess., 6S3 ; Cong- Globe, 2128. [See No. 75] 

74. Sumner's Resolution on fugitive slaves. 

1862, May 22. Introduced: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 520, Cong. Globe, 2275. 

May 23. Grimes's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 523 ; Cong. Globe, 

2306. May 26. Walton's emancipation bill amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 

Sess., 2362, 2363. 

75. Emancipation Bill. 

1862, June 4. [See No 73 ] Recommitted ; House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 799 ; 
Cong. Globe, 2561. [See No. 76] 

76. Julian's Bill to repeal the Fugitive Slave Act. [ § 101.] 

1862, June 9 Introduced with a resolution; House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess.,2)2(); 
Cong Globe, 2623. 
77 Colfax's Resolution demanding trial by jury for fugitives. 
1862. June 9. Introduced : House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., S28; Cong. Globe, 2624. 

* 78. Bill for emancipation of fugitives from disloyal masters. [§ 91] 
1862, June 17. [See No. 75] Reported in the House: House Journal, 37 Cong 2 

5t'j^., 874 ; Cong. Globe, 2764. June 18. Eliot's substitute ■• House Journal, 37 

Cong. 2 Sess., 282; Cong. Globe, 2793. June 18. Emancipation bill passed the 



1862-1S64] Resolutions and Bills. 123 

House ( yeas 82, nays 54) : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2793. June 23. Clark's 

Senate ,AiTiendment to Eliot's substitute : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2S79, 2996. 

June 28. "Trumbull's Amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2999, 3006. 

* * 79. Progress of the confiscation Bill. [ § 91-] 

i852<June 28. Pas.sed the Senate (yeas 28, nays 13) : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 

Sess., 726. July II. Report of Conference Committee adopted by the House- 

House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1045; ^"".S"- Globe, 3267. July 12. Report of 

Conference Committee adopted by the Senate : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 814; 

Cong. Globe, ^2T^. July 17. Approved by the President: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 

Sess., 3403. 

80. Bills for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act. [ §§ 101-103.] 

1863, Feb. 8. Ten Eyck's report on Wilson's repeal bill : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 3 

Sess. Dec. 14. Stevens's repeal bill: Ifonse Journal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 43 ; Cong. 

Globe, 19. Dec. 14. Julian's repeal bill: Ho2ise Journal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 43, 

Cong. Globe, 20. Dec. 14. Ashley's repeal bill : House Journal, 38 Cong 1 Sess., 

43 ; Cong. Globe, 29. 1864, Feb 8. Sumner's repeal bill ; Senate Journal, 38 Cong. 

1 Sess., 133 ; Cong. Globe, 521. Feb. 8. Spalding's repeal bill : House Journal, 38 

Cong. 1 Sess., 235; Cong. Globe, 526. Feb. 29. Sumner's bill reported: Senate 

Journal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 196 ; Cong. Globe, S64. [See No. 84] 

81. Saulsbury's substitute on the validity of personal liberty laws in 
the States, etc. 

1864, Apr. 8. Joint resolution for an amendment to the Constitution : Senate 
Journal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 311 ; Cong. Globe, 14S9. 

82. Discussion of the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Law. [ § 101.] 

1864, Apr. 19. [See No. 80.] Sherman's amendment: Senate Journal, 38 Cong. 1 
Sess., 34S ; Cong. Globe, 1710, 1714. Apr. 19. Henderson's amendment to Sher- 
man's amendment: Cong. Globe, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 1710. Apr. 19. Saulsbury's 

amendment: Senate Journal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 348, 621 ; Cong. Globe, 1715, 3191. 

Apr. 19. Hale's amendment to Saulsbury's amendment : Sejiate Journal, 38 Cojtg 1 

Sess., 358; Cong. Globe, 1782. Apr. 21. Howard's amendment: Senate Journal, 

38 Cong. 1 Sess., 358; Cong. Globe, 17S2. [See No. 81.] 

* * 83. Act repealing the Fugitive Slave Acts. [ §§ 101-104.] 

1864, June 6. [See No. 82.] Hubbard's repeal resolution : House Journal, 38 

Cong. 1 Sess., 749. June 6. House substitute for repeal bill, reported by the 

Committee on Judiciary: House Journal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 755; Cong. Globe, 2774. 

June 13. Passed House (yeas 82, nays 57) ; House Journal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 503; 

Cong. Globe, 2920. June 15. Referred in the Senate : Senate Journal, 38 Cong. 

1 Sess., 561 ; Cong. Globe, 2963. June 23. Saulsbury's amen.dment : Senate Jour- 
nal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 621; Cong. Globe, 1864. June 23. Johnson's amendment: 

Senate Jour ttal, 38 Cong. 1 Sess., 621; Cong. Globe, 3191. June 23. Passed the 

Senate: Senate Journal, 38 Cong 1 Sess., 621 ; Co?tg Globe, 3191. June 28 

Signed by the President ; House Journal, 38 Cong 1 Sess., 931 ; Cong Globe, 3360. 



APPENDIX D. 

LIST OF IMPORTANT FUGITIVE SLA VE CASES. 



No attempt has been made to present a full list of cases, but only such as had 
especial influence on the public mind, or such as illustrate some special phase of the 
question. 

1. New Netherlands and Hartford controversy. [§ 11.] 

1646. Escapes from both colonies : Wiuthrop, History of A"ew England, 383 ; 
Moore, Notes on History of Slavery in Massachusetts, 28 ; Doyle, English in America, 

I. 391. 

2. Escape to Manhattan. [§ 7.] 

1659. Four men escaped from New Amsterdam : New York Colonial Manuscripts, 
XIII. 23S; Documentary History of N. Y. Colony, II. 556 (Ch. I. p. 4). 

3. Escape of white servants to Cape May. [§ 9.] 

1661. Virginian white colonists escape : A'cw York Colonial Manuscripts, XIII. 346. 

4. Escape to the Indians. [§ 8.] 

The negro servants of the Governor of Virginia : N'ew York Colotiial Manuscripts, 

II. 637. 

5. Escape from English to French. [§ 11.] 

1748. Negro servant escapes from English to Canada: New York Colonial Manu- 
scripts, X. 209. 

6. Crispus Attucks. [§ 5.] 

1750, Oct. Escaped from Framhigham, Mass.: Boston Gazette, Oct. 2,1750; Lib- 
erator, Mar. 16, ISGO ; Nineteenth Anniversary of Boston Massacre, W. C. Neil, Address ; 
Williams, History of the N'egro Race in America, I. 330. 

7. Glasgow. [§ 12.] 

Slave freed in Glasgow : Mass. Historical Society Collections, Third Series, IX. 2. 

8. Shanley v. Haney. [§ 12.] 

1762. Slave freed in England : Quincy, Reports of Cases, 96. 

9. Somersett case. [§ 12.] 

1772. England will not return a fugitive slave : Moore, Slavery in Mass., 117 ; Cobb, 
Historical Sketch of Slavery, 163 ; Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery, 44-52; Hurd, Law 
of Freedom and Bondage, I. 189-193; Broom, Constitutional Law, 6-1 19; Ho"wells, State 
Trials, XX. i ; Tass-well-Langmead, English Constitutional History, 300, //. 

10. Ship Friendship, case of. [§ 5.] 

1770. Harbored a slave : Moore, Slavery in Mass., 1 1 7. 

11. John. [§ 17.] 

1778. Free negro kidnapped in Pennsylvania : Am. State Papers, I. 39 ; Co7!g. Globe, 
31 Cong. 1 Sess., Appendix, 1 5S5. 

[124] 



1646-1842.] Important Fugitive Slave Cases. 125 

12. Quincy's case. [§ 34.] 

1793. First case in Boston after 1793: Edzo. C. Learned, Speech on The New Fiii:;i- 
tive Slave Lazu, Chicago, Oct. 25,1850; Whiitier, Prose Works, 11, 129, A Chapter of 
History ; Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery, 232 ; Boston Atlas, Oct. 15, 1850. 

13. "Washington's slave. [§ 35.] 

1796, Oct. President Wasiiington demanded a slave from Portsmouth, N. H. : Mag- 
azine of American History, Dec, 1877, p. 759; Charles Sumner, Works, III. 177. 

14. North Carolina fugitives. [§ 19.] 

1796. Annals of Congress, 1796-7, p. 2015, 1801-2, p. 343. 

15. Columbia case. 

1804. General IJoude defends a runaway : Smcdley, Underground Railroad, 26. 

16. Solomon Northup. [§ 38.] 

1808. Kidnapping at Saratoga, N. Y. : Solomon Northrnp, An to biography. 

17. Williams case. 

1815. Claimed as a fugitive in Philadelphia: Greeley, American Conflict, I. 216. 

18. Prigg case. [§ 27.] 

1832. 16 Peters, 539 ; Report of Case of Edivard Prigg, Supreme Court, Pennsyl- 
vania; Cobb, Historical Sketch of Slavery ; Bledsoe, Liberty and Slavery, 355; Clarke, 
Antislavery Days, 69 ; Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II. 456-492 I Wilson, Rise 
and Fall of the Slave Power, I.-472-473 ; Von Hoist, Constitutional History, III. 310-312. 

19. Kidnapping of Jones. [§ 37.] 

1836. Kidnapping in New Jersey : Liberator, Aug. G, 1836. 

20. Chickasaw rescue. [§ 42.] 

1836. Rescue of two colored women on brig Chickasaw: Liberator, Aiig. 6, 1836. 

21. Schooner Boston case. [§ 47.] 

1837. Georgia and Maine controversy: Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Pozaer, 
I. 473. JViles's Register, LIII. 71, 72, LV. 356; Senate Journal, 1839-40, pp. 233-237; 
Senate Doc, 26 Cong. 1 Sess., Vol. V. Doc. 273. 

22. Philadelphia. [§43.] 

1838. Attempted rescue: Liberator, A/arch 16, 1838. 

23. Escape of Douglass. [§§ 68, 75.] 

1838. Escape of Frederick Douglass : Life and Times of Douglass ; Williams, Negro 
Race in A?nerica, II. 59, 422 ; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, I. 501, 502. 

24. Isaac Gansey case. [§ 47.] 

1839. Virginia and New York controversy : U. S. Gazette, Case of Lsaac, Judge Hop- 
kinson's speech; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Poiaer, I. 474; Seward, Works, II. 
449-518; Von Hoist, Constitutional History, II. 538-540; Senate Documents, 27 Cong. 
2 Sess., Vol. II. Doc. 96. 

25. Van Zandt case. [§ 50.] 

1840. Prosecution for aidijig escape : Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Po-.ver, 
I. 475 ; T. R. Cobb, Historical Sketch of Slavery, 207. 

26. Oberlin case. [§ 50.] 

1841 (about). Liberator, May 21, IS4I. 

27. Thompson case. 

1841. July. Prosecution for aiding escapes : Thompson, Prison Life and Reflections; 
Wilson' Rise and Fall of the Slave Po-wer, II. 69 ; Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery, 440. 

28. Latimer case. [§ 44] 

1842. Famous fugitive slave case, Boston : Liberator, Oct. 25, Nov. 11, Nov. 25, 18^2, 
Feb. 3, 7, 17, 1843, and Aug. 16, 1844 ; Law Reporter, Latimer case ; Eleventh Annual 
Report of Mass. Antislavery Society / Mass. House Journal, 1843, pp. 72, 1 58 ; Mass. Senate 
Journal, 1843, p. 232 ; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, I. 477. 



126 ■ Fugitive Slaves : — List of Cases. [App. D. 

29. Goin case. 

1844. Attempted seizure of fugitive : Liberator, April ID, 1S44- 

30. Thomas case. 

1844. Seizure in Marietta, Tenn. : Liberator, June I4, ISH- 

31. Walker case. [§ 50.] 

1844. Prosecution for aiding escapes : Trial and Imprisonment of Jonathan Walker, 
Liberator, Aug. 16, 31, Sept. 6, 13, Oct. IS, 25, and Dec. 27, 18H, Aug. 8, 15, and July 

IS, 1S45. 

32. Smithburg. 

1845. Pjattle between whites and ten runaways : Liberator, Jujie 27, 1S45. 

33. Kirk case. 

Between 1845 and 1849. Unsuccessful attempt to capture George Kirk in New 
York : Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, II. 52. Suppletnent to iVew York Legal 
Obsen'er, containing report of case, Boston Public Library. 

34. Brig Ottoman. [§ 45.] 

1846. Unsuccessful attempt to rescue slave on brig: Wilson, Rise and Fall of the 
Slave Po7ver, II. 54. 

35. Kennedy case. [43.] 

1847. Riot in Carlisle, Penn. : Liberator, Sept. 10, 27, 1S47 ; Congressional Globe, 
1860-61, pp. 801, 802, 908. 

36. Slaves on board Brazilian ship. 

1847. Attempt to rescue: Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, II. 53; Liber- 
ator, Aug. 20, mr. 

37. Ohio and Kentucky controversy. [§ 48 ] 

1848. Controversy on account of extradition demanded : Liberator, July I4, IS^S. 

38. South Bend case. 

1847, Oct. 9. Fugitives discharged on trial in Michigan : South Bend Fugitive Slave 
case. 

39. Brig Wm. Purrington. 

1S48. Escape from : Liberator, Dec. 31, IS^S. 

40. Drayton and Sayres. [§ 50.] 

1848. Prosecution for aiding escapes: Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, 
II. 104. 

41. Crafts escape. [§ 69.] 

1848. Escape of William and Ellen Crafts: Liberator, N'oi: 1,1850 ; Still, Under- 
ground Railroad, 36S ; Wilson, Rise and Full of the Slave Power, II. 325. 

42. "Washington case. [§ 39] 
Between 1S40-1850: Liberator, May 26, 1S4S. 

43. Hamlet case. [§ 53.] 

1850. Rendition in N. Y. : Fugitive Slave Bill, its History and Unconstitutionality, 
with an Account of the Seizure of James Hamlet, 3 ; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave 
Power, II. 304. 

44. Gannett case. 

1850, Oct. 18. Alleged fugitive discharged in Philadelphia: Wilson, Rise and Fall 
of the Slave Power, II. 326; May, Fugitive Slave Law and its Victims, 8. 

45. Gibson case. 

1850, Dec. 21. Rendition of an innocent man : Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave 
Power, II. 327; May, Fugitive Slave Lazv and its Victims, 8; Still, Underground Rail- 
road, 349. 

46. Case in Pennsylvania. 

1851, Jan. House of colored man entered by force : Liberator, Jan. 10, 1851. 



1S44-1S54] Lnportant Fugitive Slave Cases. 127 

47. Sims case. [§ 54.] 

1851. Rendition in Boston: Liberator, April 17 and 18, 1851; Daily Morning 
Chronicle, April 26, 1851; Tiventteth Anmial Report of Mass. Antislavery Society, 
1855, p. 19 ; IVilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, II. 333 ; New England Magazine, 
Ju7ie, 1890 ; May, Fugitive Slave Law and its Victims, 16 ; Trial of Sims, Arguments by 
R. Rantoul,fr. and C. G. Loring ; C. F. Adams, Richard Henry Dana, I. 185-301. 

48. Shadrach case. [§ 57.] 

1851, Feb. Rendition in Boston : Liberator, Feb. 21, May 30, 1851 ; Cong. Globe, 
31 Cong. 2 Sess., Appendix, 238, 295, 510; Von Hoist, 111. 21 ; May, Fngitii'e Slave 
Laii) and its Victims, 10; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, II. 329; JVeiu 
England Magazine, May, 1890 ; Boston Traveller, Feb. 15, 1851 ; Boston Coicrier, Feb. 
17, 1851 ; Washington National Era, Feb. 27, 1851 ; Statesman's Manual, III. 1919. 

49. Christiana case. [§ 60.] 

1851, Sept. Riot in Christiana : Parker's account. The Freedman's Story, T. W. 
Higginson, Atlantic Monthly, Feb. and March, 1866 ; U. S. v. Hantoay, Treason, 247 
Smedley, Underground Railroad, 105, 107, 130, 223; May, Fugitive Slave Law, 14; 
Liinsford Lane, 114; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, II. 324; History of the 
Trial of Castner Hanway and others for Treason ; N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 12, 1851, and 
Nov. 26 to Dec. 12 ; Greeley, American Conflict, I. 215 ; N'ational Antislavery Standard, 
Sept. 18, 1851 ; Lowell Joui-nal, Sept 19, 1851; Boston Daily Traveller, Sept. 12, 1851; 
Still, Undei-ground Railroad, 348. 

50. Miller. [§ 61.] 

1851, Nov. Mr. Miller murdered : Liberator, Feb. 4, 1853 ; Lunsford Lane, 113; 
May, Fugitive Slave Lazv, 15 ; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Pozuer, II. 324. 

51. Jerry case. [§ 58 ] 

1851, Oct. Rescue in Syracuse, N. Y. : -Liberator, Oct. 10 to 17, 1851 ; Life of 
Gerrit Smith, 1 17; Trial of H. W. Allen, 3; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave 
Po2uer, II. 327. 

52. Parker rescue. 

1851, Dec. 31. Rescue by Mr. Miller: Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Pcnver, 
II. 324; May, Fugitive Slave Law and its Victi?ns, 15; Liberator, 1853, Feb. 4; 
Lunsford Lane, 113. 

53. Brig Florence 

1853. Rescue of slave on board by Mr. Bearse : Bearse, Reminiscences of Fugitive 
Slave Days in Boston, 34. 

54. Le'wis case. 

1853. Escape of Lewis from trial : Liberator, Oct. 28, 1853. 
^5. Glover case. 

1854. Joshya Glover rescued by a mob at Milwaukee : Wilson, Rise and Fall of the 
Slave Power, 444 ; Liberator, April 7, 24, 1854. 

56. Bath. 

1854. Escape to Canada from ship from Florida : Liberator, Oct. 6, 1854. 

57. Burns case. [§ 55] 

1854. Rendition in Boston : Liberator, May, June, 1854, Aug. 22, 1861 ; Kidnap- 
ping of Burns, Scrapbook collected by Theo. Parker ; Personal Statement of Air. El- 
bridge Sprague, N. Abington ; Accounts in Boston Jotirnal, May 27, 29, 1854 ! Daily 
Advertiser, May 26, 29, June 7, 8, July 17 ; Traveller, May 27, 20, June 2, 3, 6, 10, July 
15, 18, Oct. 3, Nov. 29, Dec. 5, 7, 1854, April 3, 4, 10, 11, 1855 ; Evening Gazette, May 27, 
1854 ; Worcester Spy, May 31 ; Argument of Mr. R. H. Dana ; May, Fugitive Slave 
Law and its Victims, 256; Clarke, Antislavery Days, Sj ; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the 



1 2 8 Fugitive Slaves : — List of Cases. [App. D. 

Slave Power, II. 435, Stevens, History of Anthony Burns ; Greeley, Ameiuan Conflict 
I. 218, New York Tribune, May 26, 185^ ; Liberator, June 2, 9, 16, 1854 / ^''^w J^olst 
VI. 62, Garrisons' Garrison, II. 201, III. 409; C. F.Adams, Dana, I. 262-330. 

58. Garner. [§ 56] 

1856. Rendition of a family in Ohio : Liberator, Feb. 8, 22, 20, 1856 ; May, Fugitive 
Slave Law atid its Victims, 37; Lunsford Lane, 119, Greeley, American Conflict, 
I. 219 , Lalor's Cyclopaedia, I. 207 ; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, II. 446, 447. 

59. Williamson case 

1856, Jan. Prosecution for aiding fugitives . Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave 
Power, II. 448; May, Fugitive Slave Law and its Victims, 9,34; Annual Report of 
American Antislavery Society, N. Y., May 7, 1856, p. 24 ; Narrative of the Facts in the 
Case of Passmore Williamson, Penn. Antislavery Society. 

60. Johnson case. 

1856, July 16. Rescue of slave on ship from Mobile : Liberator, July 18, 1856. 

61. Gatchell case 

1857, Jan. Rendition of Philip Young : Chatnbers, Slavery and Color ; Fugitive 
Slave Law, Appendix, 197. 

62 Oberlin-Wellington case. [§ 59 ] 

1858, Rescue at Wellington : Liberator, Jan. 28, April 29, May 6, June 3, June 10, 
1859 ; Shepherd, Oberlin-Wellington Rescue; Lunsford Lane, 179; Anglo-African Mag- 
azine (Oberlin-Wellington Rescue), 209; May, Fugitive Slave Law and its Victims, 108. 

63. John Brown's Raid. |§ 62.] 

1858. Raid in Missouri; Sanborn, Life and Letters of John Brown, 420; Von 
Hoist, John Brown, 104. 

64. Nalle case. 

1859, April 28. Rescue of Charles Nalb by a mob ; Bradford, Harriet, the Moses 
of her People, Appendix, 143 ; Liberator, May 4, 1830. 

65. Anderson case. [§ 23 ] 

i860. Extradition case between U. S. and Canada: Liberator, Dee. 3, 1860; 
Pamphlets on Anderson Case, Boston Public Library; Life of Gerrit Smith, 15; 
Liberator, Jan. 22, 1S61. 

66. Wisdom case. [§ 91] 

1861. Rendition by army officers : Liberator, July 19, 18G1. 

67. Major Sherwood's servant. [§ 91 ] 

1861. Rendition ordered in army: Liberator, July 19, ISGl. 

68. Norfolk case. 

1863. Kidnapping by N. Y. Volunteers : Liberator, March 27, 1863. 

69. Archer Alexander 

1863. Fugitive during the war" Archer Alexander. 



APPENDIX E. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF FUGITIVE SLAVE CASES AND 
FUGITIVE SLAVE LEGISLATION. 



I. Sources of information. 8. Speeches. 



2. 



Libraries. 9- Reminiscences. 



3. Secondary works. ro. Reports of societies. 

4. Biographies. H' Periodicals and newspapers. 

5. Original sources. 12 Materials bearing on legislation. 

6. Slave autobiographies. 13- Alphabetical list of works. 

7. Records of trials. 

1. Sources of information. , 

There are many sources from which material for a study of fugitive slaves may be 
gathered. Almost any work upon the slavery question touches sooner or later upon 
this topic, and the difficulties arise rather from the amount of the literature which must 
be examined than from lack of information. No formal bibliography of the subject, or 
of any phase of it, has been found ; it has therefore been necessary to go through a 
large body of material, and to sift out references which bear upon the subject. 

2. Libraries. 

The labor has been much facilitated by the completeness and convenient arrange- 
ment of the literature bearing upon slavery in the libraries of Cambridge and Boston. 
The Harvard College Library possesses two unique collections of slavery pamphlets, one 
the bequest of Charles Sumner, the other the gift of Colonel T. W. Higginson; and the 
Card Catalogue of the Library is a comprehensive guide to a large alcove of other 
books. The great collections of the Boston Public Library have also been made acces- 
sible by the full Card Catalogue of that Library. The Boston Athenaeum has also 
furnished valuable material ; and in the Massachusetts State Library is an excellent 
set of State Statutes, which has been freely used. I have not been able to consult 
the antislavery collection of the Cornell Library at Ithaca. 

3. Secondary works. 

The material upon fugitive slaves, as upon any topic, may be divided into two 
classes, secondary and original. The general and local histories which come under 
the first class have been of good service as guides to further investigation. The Rise 
and Fall of the Slave Rower in America, by Hettry Wilson, takes up the whole question 
of slavery in a thorough manner, and devotes special attention to the debates in Con- 
gress. Though long and ill-arranged, it is comprehensive and trustworthy. Unfortu- 
nately, the work is not provided with foot-notes. Williams's History of the Negro Race, 
and Greeley's American Conflict, are other surveys of the whole subject. For a discus- 
sion of political forces and constitutional questions, Von Hoist is the best authority, 
while Hiird, besides enumerating the statutes from colonial times down, considers the 

[129] 9 



130 Fugitive Slaves : — Bibliography. [App. E. 

subject with great clearness from a judicial point of view, describes many cases, and in 
foot-notes gives references to others. 

Studies of colonial slavery are found in Lodge's English Colonies in America and 
Doyle's English in America. Several special essays have been printed on slavery in 
Massachusetts; Deane's and Moore's Notes on Slavery, and Washburn's Extinction of 
Slavery in Massachusetts. Little attention is in any of these works given to fugitive 

slaves. 

To another class belong books descriptive of the institution of slavery. Mrs. 
Fratices Kemble wrote about life on a Southern plantation before the war, and the 
Cotton Kingdom and other volumes by Frederick Law Olmsted give many interesting 
details, and furnished me with much material for the chapter on Fugitives and their 
Friends. 

4. Biographies. 

Biographies of antislavery men are likely to contain information on fugitive slave 
cases. The Life of Isaac T. Hopper is full of accounts of his ways of aiding flight, and 
for the same reason the Life of Gerrit Smith is exceedingly interesting. Birney's Life 
of James G. Birncy deals little with fugitives. The biographies of Mrsi Lydia Maria 
Child, Arthur and Lewis Tappan, John Brown, Garrison, Phillips, and the Grimke 
sisters, may also be mentioned. Others, like those of Jonathan Walker, L. W. Paine, 
Daniel Drayton, captain of the schooner Pearl, W. L. Chaplin, Work, Burr, and 
Thompson, and the recently published Life of Rev. Calvin Colman, re\ate simply the 
stories of trials and imprisonments for aiding fugitives, and are often more in the nature 
of original than secondary sources. 

5. Original sources. 

Very early in the preparation of this work it became evident that no writer had 
systematically examined and compared the legislation of the Colonies and States, or 
searched the records of Congress, or looked for contemporary accounts of any con- 
siderable number of escapes. I was therefore obliged to search for such original mate- 
rial as was within my reach. Doubtless some important books and pamphlets have 
escaped me, and an e.xamination of other collections would enlarge the bibliography ; 
but the effort has been made to exhaust the literature of the subject, except in news- 
papers. 

6. Slave autobiographies. 

Out of the great variety of original sources containing descriptions of slave life and 
escapes, the autobiographies of the slaves themselves are the most interesting, and often 
the saddest. The Rev. James Freeman Clarke says, in his Antislavery Days: "Even 
now, when it is all over, the flesh creeps and the blood curdles in the veins at the ac- 
counts of the dreadful cruelties practised on slaves in many parts of the South. I would 
advise no one to read such histories to-day unless his nerves are very well strung." 
Frederick Douglass has given us two books, one written before slavery was abolished, 
and a fuller account afterward, when it was no longer imprudent to reveal the whole 
story of his escape. Many of these lives were published by antislavery people, who 
wished by such means to rouse the North. Such are the stories of Box Broxun, Peter 
Still, Archy Moore, Solomon Northrnp, Liuisford Lane, and others, most of which have 
been quoted above. ' 

7. Records of trials. 

Much descriptive detail can often be found in the published reports of trials. A 
volume is devoted to the Oberlin-Wellington case, and several volumes have been pub- 
lished on the Burns trial. For the Prigg and Hanway cases, and others of importance, 
the records of the Supreme Court and lower courts have been consulted. Most of the 
important cases were tried in State courts or before commissioners, and the only re- 
ports are fugitive pamphlets, of which many have been consulted and cited. 



Nos. 3-12.] Sources. 131 

8. Speeches. 

In the study of public sentiment and for the weighing of argument the speeches of 
Phillips, Simmer, Seiuard, Giddiitgs, Webster, Mann, Rantoitl, Loj-ing, and others, are of 
the greatest value. They often throw light upon obscure cases, and the fugitive slave 
stories brought in as illustrations have sometimes led to the discovery of interesting 
and forgotten cases. 

9. Reminiscences. 

A valuable aid in reconstructing in the mind the conditions of the slavery struggle are 
the reminscences of participants. Kcv. James Freeman darkens Aiitislavery Days and 
Mr. Parker Pillsbury's book have been helpful in these chapters. A pamphlet by Mr. 
Austin Bearse describes the Fugitive Slave Laws in Boston, and relates the work of 
the Vigilance Committee in protecting escaped negroes. The books of Still, Smedley, 
and Coffin, on the workings of the Underground Railroad, are composed chiefly of 
reminiscences, and have furnished many essential facts. 

10. Reports of societies. 

The reports of the various antislavery societies, especially of those of Massachusetts 
and Pennsylvania, have also been examined with profit as to the work among the refu- 
gees in Canada, etc. For the colonial period the publications of the Massachusetts and 
New York Historical Societies are exceedingly important, and have been freely drawn 
upon. 

11. Periodicals and ne"V7spapers. 

Not much has been gathered from periodicals. Poole's Index was used and occa- 
sionally something of importance was discovered. Thus The Freedman's Story in the 
Atlantic Monthly has furnished one of the most striking of the stories about resistance to 
escapes. Such articles are few, and occur long after the slavery period, when such 
disclosures were no longer unpopular. The Magazine of American History contains 
several articles. Among newspapers, the Liberator is without doubt the most complete 
record of the extreme antislavery sentiment toward the fugitive slave laws and their 
workings. Each case as it occurs is fully commented upon, and in addition there is 
each week a column or two of atrocities, and among them stories of fugitives are 
often given. The Harvard College Library contains a complete file, which I have 
examined ; and references to the Liberator are therefore frequent throughout the 
work. The colonial newspapers are of little value, except for the conclusions which 
may be drawn from the advertisements for runaways. Newspapers of that time were 
so limited in scope, that an affair so unimportant to them as a fugitive slave case would 
scarcely appear. 

12. Materials bearing on legislation. 

The materials for the study of colonial legislation must be gathered from many 
sources. The best collection of them in Boston may be found at the State Library. In 
some colonies there are carefully edited series of volumes chronologically arranged, 
but in others the records have been but irregularly printed. The laws of New Nether- 
lands and of early New York are easily accessible in well printed volumes of a recent 
date. For the Southern States, the Hening edition of the Virginia Statutes at Large is 
clear, and covers a long period. There is also the Cooper collection for South Caro- 
lina, Bacon's series for Maryland, Iredell's edition of South Carolina Statutes, and 
Learning and Spicer for New Jersey. There are of course many others, but these- 
comprise the most important. 

From the beginning of the Constitutional period, the proceedings of Congress may 
be followed as minutely as desired. An outline of the proceedings is given in the 
Journals of the Senate and House, while for a fuller account and reports of speeches 
the Annals of Congress and Congressional Debates to 1837, and the Congressional 
Globes from 1S33 to 1S63, furnish ample material. Information in regard to the 



132 Fugitive Slaves: — Bibliogj'apJiy. [App. E. 

number and personnel of the House is most readily gathered from Poore's Congres- 
sional Directory. 

13. Alphabetical list of works. 

Thi.s list includes all the books and articles which have been of service in preparing 
the monograph, except a few of the general histories. 

Adams, Charles Francis, Jr. Richard Henry Dana: a Biography. 2 vols. 
Boston, 1S90. 

Allen, H. W. Trial of U. S. Deputy Marshal for Kidnapping, etc. Syracuse, 
1852. 

Antislavery Almanacs, miscellaneous collection of, in the Library of Harvard 
College. 

Antislavery Pamphlets, miscellaneous collection of, unsuitable for binding, in 
the Library of Harvard College. 

Antislavery Societies, Annual Reports of. 

Amherstburg Quarterly Mission Journal, Amherstburg, Canada West. 

Ball, J. P. Mammoth Pictorial Tour of the United States, compiled for a Pano- 
rama. Cincinnati, 1S55. 

Bayard, James. A Brief Exposition of the Constitution of the United States. 
Philadelphia, 1845. 

Bearse, Anthony. Remembrances of Fugitive Slave Law Days in Boston. Bos- 
ton, 18S0. pp. 41. 

Birney, J. G. E.xamination of the Decision of the Supreme Court of the United 
States in the Case of Strader, Gorman, and Armstrong vs. Christopher Graham, 1850. 
Cincinnati, 1S51. pp. 47. 

Bledsoe, Albert T. An Essay on Liberty and Slavery. Philadelphia, 1S87. 
PP- Z^Z- 

Bowditch, H. I. To the Public. [Defence of his conduct in the case of Latimer 
against the charges of J. B. Gray.] Boston, 1842. pp. 11. 

Bowditch, "W. I. The Rendition of Anthony Burns. Boston, 1S54. pp. 40. 

. The United States Constitution a Pro-slavery Instrument. New York, 

1855. pp. 12. 

Bowen, C. W. Arthur and Lewis Tappan, a Paper read at the Fiftieth Anniver- 
sary of the New York City. Antislavery Society, Oct. 2, 1883. New York, 1SS3. ' (?) 
pp. 116. 

Bowen, F. Fugitive Slaves. \vi A^irth American B.cvie%v,\2!iYA. 2^2. (July, 1850.) 

Boston Slave Riot and Trial of Anthony Burns. Boston, 1854. 

Brown, W. W. Narrative of a Fugitive Slave. Boston, 1848. pp. 144. 

Bump, O. F. Notes of Constitutional Decisions, being the Digest of the Provin- 
cial Literpretations of the Constitution of the United States, etc. New York, 1878. 

Canada Mission, 7th Annual Report of. Rochester, N. Y. 

Case of "William R. Chaplin, etc. Boston, 1851. pp. 54. 

Chambers, William. American Slavery and Color. London, 1857. 

Chase, S. P. Reclamation of Fugitive Slaves from Service, an Argument for the 
Defendant, submitted to the Supreme Court of the United States at December Term, 
1840, in Case of W. Jones vs. John Van Zandt. Cincinnati, 1847. pp. loS. 

Child, Lydia Maria. The Duty of Disobedience to the Fugitive Slave Act (an 
Appeal to the Legislators of Mass.). Boston, i860, pp. 36. 

. Isaac T. Hopper (a True Life). Boston, 1853. pp. 120. 

. Letters of Lydia Maria Child. Boston, 1883. 

Clarke, James Freeman. Antislavery Days. New York, 1SS4. 



Nos. 12-13.] Alphabetical List. 133 

Clarke, Lewis and Milton, Narrative of the Sufferings of, among the Slave- 
holders of Kentucky. Boston, 1S4S. pp. 144. 

Cobb, T. R. Historical Sketch of Slavery. Philadelphia, 1836. 

Coffin, L. (President of Underground Railroad). Reminiscences of a Lifetime 
spent in Behalf of the Slave. Cincinnati, 1876. 

Constitutional Provision, The, respecting Fugitives from Justice, and the Act 
of Congress, Sept. iS, 1850. Boston, 1S52. 

Cooley, Thomas M. The General Principles of Constitutional Law in the United 
States of America. Boston, 18S0. pp. 376. 

Daggs (Ruel) vs. Elihu Frazier et als. Fugitive Slave Case, Southern Divis- 
ion of Iowa. Burlington, 1850. pp. 40. 

Deane, Charles, and Moore. Slavery in Massachusetts. Connecticut, 1877. 

Desty, Robert. Constitution of the United States, with Notes by Robert Desty, 
etc. San Francisco, 1887. 

Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of his Life. Written by himself. Boston, 1S45. 

. Life and Times of Frederick Douglass. Hartford, 1881-82. 

Drayton, Daniel. Personal Memoirs of, for four years and four months (a 
prisoner for charity's sake in Washington Jail), including Narrative of Voyage and 
Capture of Schooner Pearl. New York, 1855. 

Drew, Benjamin. North Side View of Slavery, or Narrative of a Refugee in 
Canada, with an Account of the History of the Colored Population in Upper Canada. 
Boston, 1856. 

Eliot, W. G. The Story of Archer Alexander from Slavery to Freedom. Boston, 
1885. 

Elliott, Chas. W. The New England History, from the Discovery of the Con- 
tinent by the Northmen, A. D. 9S6, to the Period when the Colonies declared their 
Independence, A. D. 1776. 2 vols. New York, 1857. 

Friend, By A. The Experiences of Thomas Jones, who was for forty-three years 
a Slave. Boston, 1850. 

Frothingham, O. B. Life of Gerrit Smith. A Biography. New York, 1878. 
pp. 381. 

Fugitive Slave Bill enacted by U. S. Congress, and approved by President 
Fillmore, Sept. 8, 1S50. Boston, 1854. pp. 7. 

Fugitive Slaves. In Democratic Review, XXVIII. 57 (April, 1851). 

Furness, "W. H. The Moving Power. A Discourse delivered in the First Con- 
gregational Unitarian Church in Philadelphia, Feb. 9, 1851, after the occurrence of a 
Fugitive Slave Case. Philadelphia, 1851. 

Garrison, Wendell Phillips, and Garrison, Francis Jackson. William 
Lloyd Garrison, 1805-1879 : the Story of his Life, told by his Children [Wendell Phil- 
lips Garrison and Francis Jackson Garrison]. 4 vols., 8vo. New York, 1885. 

Giddings, J. R. The Exiles of Florida, or Crimes committed by our Government 
against Maroons who fled from South Carolina, etc. Columbus, O., 1858. 

Goodell, ■William. Views of American Constitutional Law in its Bearings upon 
American Slavery. 2d ed. Utica, N. Y., 1845. 

Goodloe, D. R. The Southern Platform, or Manual of Southern Sentiments on 
the Subject of Slavery. Boston, 1858. 

Gray, A. F. (?) Letter to W. H. Seward touching the Surrender of certain 
Fugitives from Justice. New York, 1841. 

Great Britain. British Documents, Parliament of Great Britain, Correspondence 
respecting Case of Fugitive Slave Anderson. London, 1S61. 

Greeley, Horace. The American Conflict; a History of the Great Rebellion, 
1S60-65 ; its moral and political Phases, with the Drift and Progress of America re- 
specting Human Slavery from 1776. 2 vols., 8vo. Hartford, 1864. 



134 Fugitive Slaves: — Bibliography. [App. e. 

Green, William (formerly a slave), Narrative of Events in the Life of. Written 
by himself. Springfield, 1853. PP- -3- 

Hav^kins, W. G. Lunsford Lane, or Another Helper from North Carolina. 
Boston, 1863. 

Helper, H. R. The Impending Crisis in the South, and How to Meet it. New 
York, 1S60. pp. 420. 

Henson, Josiah. Life of J. Henson, formerly a Slave, now an Inhabitant of 
Canada, as narrated by himself. 

Hildreth, R. The Slave, or Memoirs of Archy Moore. Boston, 1S40 

Hopper, I. T. Thomas Cooper. New York, 1S37. 

Hossack, John. Speech of John Hossack, convicted of Violation of the Fugitive 
Slave Law, before Judge Drummond of the United States District Court, Chicago, 
111. New York, i860, pp. 12. 

Howe, S. G. Refugees from the South in Canada West. Report to Freedman's 
Inquiry Committee. Boston, 1864. 

Hurd, J. C. The Law of Freedom and Bondage. 2 vols. New York, 1S58, 1S62. 

. Topics of Jurisprudence connected with the Condition of Freedom and 

Bondage. New York, 1856. pp. ix, 113. 

Hurd, R. C. Treatise on the Right of Personal Liberty, and on the Writ of 
Habeas Corpus, and Practice connected with it, with a View of the Law of Extra- 
dition of Fugitives. Albany, 1858. 

Joliffe, John. In the Matter of George Gordon's Petition for Pardon. John 
Joliffe's Argument for Petitioner. Cincinnati, 1862. 

Kane, Judge. District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of 
Pennsylvania. United States of America, ex relatione Wheeler, vs. Williamson. 
Opinion of Judge Kane, Oct. 12, 1855. Philadelphia, 1855. pp. 20. 

Kemble, Frances Anne. Journal of a Residence on a Georgian Plantation in 
1836-39. New York, 1S63. 

Kent, J. Commentaries on American Law. 4 vols. Boston, 1884. 

Kidnapping. Africajt Observer, May, 1837. 

Kingsbury, Harmon. The Fugitive Slave Bill, its History and Unconstitu- 
tionality : with an Account of the Seizure and Enslavement of James Hamlet and his 
subsequent Restoration to Liberty (with Appendix). New York, 1850. 

Larned, E. C. Argument on the Trial of Joseph Stout, indicted for rescuing a 
Fugitive Slave from a United States Deputy Marshal at Ottawa, 111., Oct. 20, 1S59, 
delivered March 12 and 13, 186-. Chicago, 186-. pp. 43. 

. The new Fugitive Slave Law. Speech of E. C. Larned, Chicago, Oct. 25, 

1S50. Chicago, 1850. 

Latimer Case. From the Law Reporter, March, 1S43. Boston, 1843. pp. 10. 

Letter to His Excellency, William H. Seward, Governor of the State of New York, 
touching the Surrender of certain Fugitives from Justice. New York, 1841. pp. loi. 

Lord, J. C. The Higher Law in its Application to the Fugitive Slave Bill. 
Buffalo, 1 851. 

Madison, James. The Constitution a Pro-slavery Compact. New York, 1844. 

Mann, Horace. Fugitive Slave Law. Boston, 1851. 

Massacluisetts Senate. Various Documents. Senate, 1S51, No. 89 (examina- 
tion of Sims Case). 

May, S. J. American Antislavery Society. The Fugitive Slave Law and its 
Victims. New York, 1856, 1861. 

. Catalogue of Antislavery Publications in America, 1750-1830. 

Moore, G. H. Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts. New York, 
1866. 



No. 13.] Alphabetical List. I35 

Narrative of Facts in the Case of Passmore Williamson. Philadelphia, 1855. 

Narrative of Solomon Northrup, a Citizen of New York, kidnapped in Wash- 
ington in 1844, and rescued in 1S53 from a Cotton Plantation near I^ed River, Lou- 
isiana. Cincinnati, H. W. Derby. 

Needles, Edward. Historical Memoir of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting 
the Abolition of Slavery. Philadelphia, 1848. 

New York Court of Appeals, Report of the Lemmon Slave Case. New York, 
iS6i. pp. 446. 

New York Legal Observer, Supplement to, containing Report of the Case In 
the Matter of George Kirk, a Fugitive Slave, heard before J. W. Edmunds, Circuit 
Judge ; also the Argument of John Jay, Counsel for the Slave. New York, 1844. 
pp. 20. 

Oberlin-'Wellington Rescue. Nc%u Euglandcr, XVII. 686. 

Olmsted, F. L. The Cotton Kingdom. 2 vols. New York, 1861. 

Paine, Byron, and Smith, A. D. Unconstitutionality of the Fugitive Slave Act. 
Argument of A. D. Smith. Milwaukee, 1854. pp. 35. 

Paine, L. W. Six Years in a Georgia Prison. Narrative of L. W. Paine, who 
suffered Imprisonment for aiding Slaves to escape from that State after he had fled 
from Slavery. Boston, 1852. 

Parker, Joel. Personal Liberty Laws (State of Massachusetts) and Slavery in 
the Territories (Case of Dred Scott). Boston, 1861. pp. 97. 

Parker, Theodore. Anthony Burns. [Collection made and arranged in the form 
of a scrap-book by Theodore Parker, whose Autograph and Manuscript it contains.] 
Boston Public Library. 

Peabody, Andrew Preston. [Address before the New England Historic- 
Genealogical Society, May 6, 1S91.] 

Peabody, E. Narratives of Fugitive Slaves. Christian Examiner, XLVII. 61. 

Phillips, Wendell. Argument of Wendell Phillips, Esq., against Repeal of the 
Personal Liberty Laws before the Committee of the Legislature, Tuesday, January 29, 
1861. Boston, 1861. 

. No Slave Hunting in the Old Bay State, before Committee on Federal 

Relations, H. R., Thursday, Feb. 17, 1859. Boston, 1859. 

. Speech in the House of Representatives of Massachusetts before the 

Committee on Federal Relations [against the recapture of fugitive slaves]. Boston, 

1859 

Pickard, Mrs. K. E. R. The Kidnapped and the Ransomed. Personal Reflec- 
tions of Peter Still and his Wife Vina after Forty Years of Slavery. Syracuse, New 
York, 1856. 

Pierce, E. L. Remarks of E. L. Pierce before the Committee of the Legislature of 
Massachusetts on the General Statutes relating to Personal Liberty, at their Hearing 
of Feb. I, 1861. Boston, 1861. 

Pomeroy, J. N. An Introduction to the Constitutional Laws of the United States. 
Boston, 1868. 

Poole, W. F. Sketch of Antislavyy Opinion before Year 1800. An Essay read 
before the Cincinnati Literary Club, Nov. 16, 1872. Cincinnati, 1873. 

Randolph, Peter, an emancipated slave. Sketches of Slave Life. Boston, 1855. 
pp. 82. 

Rantoul, Robert. Speech at Lynn, April 3, 1852, on the Fugitive Slave Law. 
Speech in Congress on June 11, 1S52, on the Constitutionality of the Fugitive Slave 
Law. 

Rendition of Fugitive Slaves. Acts of 1793 and 1S50, and Decisions of the 
Supreme Court sustaining them. The Dred Scott Case. i860, pp. 15. 



136 Fugitive Slaves: — Bibliography. [Arp. E. 

Refugees' Home Society, Report of Committee. Winsor, 1S52. pp. 8. 

Report of the Trial of Castncr Haaway for Treason, etc. Philadelphia, 1852. 
pp. 275. 

Report of the Case of Edward Prigg against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 
in Superior Court. Philadelphia, 1S42. 

Roper, Moses, Narrative of the Adventures and Escape of, from American Slavery. 
Philadelphia, 1S38. pp. 89. 

Sergeant, Thomas. On Constitutional Law. Philadelphia, 1830. 

SeTward, W. H. John Van Zandt, etc., Argument for Defendant by W. H. 
Seward. Albany, 1847. pp. 40. 

Sherman, H. Slavery in the United States ; from the Establishment of the Con- 
federation to the present Time. Hartford, i860, pp. 60. 

Shipherd, J. R. History of Oberlin- Wellington Rescue. Boston, 1859. 

Smedley, R. C, M. D. History of the Underground Railroad in Chester and 
neighboring Counties of Pennsylvania. Lancaster, Pa., 1883. pp. 395. 

Smith, Gerrit. Argument on the Fugitive Slave Law, June, 1852, on the Trial of 
H. W. Allen for Kidnapping. Syracuse, pp. 32. No date. 

South Bend Fugitive Slave Case, The. (John Ames vs. L. B. Newton.) 
New York. pp. 24. 

Spooner, L. A Defence for Fugitive Slaves against the Acts of Congress of Feb. 
12, 1793, and Sept. iS, 1850. Boston, 1850. Pam. 

Stearns, Charles. Narrative of Henry Box Brown, who escaped from Slavery 
enclosed in a Box three feet long and two wide. Boston, 1S49. 

Stearns, Charles. The " Fugitive Slave Law of the United States." 

Stevens, C. E. Anthony Burns (a Fugitive Slave). A History. Boston, 1S56. 

Still, W. The Underground Railroad. Philadelphia, 1872. 

Stroud, G. M. Sketch of Laws relative to Slavery in the several States of the 
United States of America. Philadelphia, 1S27. pp. 128. 

Sumner, Charles. Fugitive Slaves. Brozunson, XI. 487 (October, 1854). 

Tappan, Arthur. The Life of. New York, 1S70. 

Thomas, B. F. A few Suggestions to a Friend upon Personal Liberty Laws and 
Secession (so called), in a Letter to a Friend. Boston, 1861. 

Thompson, George. Prison Life and Reflections, Narrative of Trial, Imprison- 
ment, etc. of Work, Burr, and Thompson for aiding Slaves to Liberty. Hartford, 1849. 

. The Negroes' Flight from American Slavery to British Freedom. 

1849. pp. 16. 

Watson, Henry. Narrative of Henry Watson, a Fugitive Slave. Written by 
himself. Boston, 1848. pp. 48. 

Weld, S. D. American Slavery as it is : Testimony of Thousands of Witnesses. 
New York, 1839. 

Wesley, Rev. J. The Rev. J. W. Loguen as a Slave and as a Freeman. Syra- 
cuse, New York, 1S59. 

Weston, G. M. Progress of Slavery in the United States. Washington, 1857. 

White Slave, The : Or Memoirs of a Fugitive. Boston, 1852. pp. 408. 

Whittier, John G. The Writings of John G. Whittier. Boston, 188S-S9. 7 vols. 
i2mo. 

"Wigham, E. Antislavery Cause in America and its Martyrs. London, 1863. 

Wilcox, A. The Powers of the Federal Government over Slavery. Baltimore, 
1S62. pp. 23. 

Willey, Rev. Austin. History of the Antislavery Cause in State and Nation. 
Portland, 1S86. pp. xii, 503. 



No. 13.] Alphabetical List. 137 

"Wilson, Henry. History of the Antislavery Measures in the 37th and 3Sth United 
States Congresses. Boston, 1S65. 

. History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America. 3 vols. 

Boston, 1S75-1877. 

Williams, George W. History of the Negro Race in America. 2 vols. New 
York, 1S83. 

Wisconsin Supreme Court. Unconstitutionality of the Fugitive Slave Act. 
Decision in Case of Booth and Bycraft. Milwaukee, 1855. 



INDEX. 



ABOLITION, in the D. C, 82, 98, 121 

(No. 62), 122 (No. 65); of the slave 
trade in the D. C, 25. See also Anti- 
slavery, Emancipation. 

Abolitionists, known to slaves, 53 ; efforts 
on the Underground Railroad, 64. See 
also Antislavery. 

Acorn, ship, 44. 

Act, first fugitive slave, 105, 106 (No. 9) ; 
second fugitive slave, 11 2-1 15 (No. 31) ; 
Grimes, 120 (No. 51); Blair, 121 (No. 
58); repealing fugitive slave act, 123 
(No. 83). See also Bill. 

Adams, , against fugitive slave bill, 

21. 

Adams, J. Q., in Treaty of Ghent Con- 
vention, 25 ; presented petitions, 40. 

Advertisement, of runaways, 4 ; colonial, 
5 ; later, 56, 80 ; of probable place of 
refuge of an habitual runaway, 57. 

Albany, escapes from, 8, 97, 98 (No. 50). 

Aldrich, amendment, 121 (No. 58). 

Alexander, Archer, 128 (No. 69). 

Alien and Sedition Acts, absorb attention, 
20. 

Allen, Henry W., tried for kidnapping, 
49. 

Amendments to the Constitution, 86, 87. 

Amsterdam, banishes runaway colonists, 
92 (No. 15). 

Anderson case, 25, 26, 128 (No. 65).^ 

Antislavery men, biographies of, 132 (No. 

4)- 
Antislavery reminiscences, 131 (No. 9). 
Antislavery sentiment, rise of, 35. 
Antislavery societies, character of work, 

38; reports of, 131 (No. 10). 
Apprentices, fugitive, 91 (No. 9), 95 (No. 

39)- 
Arbitration, in Creole case, 27. 
Army officers, arrests by, 79. 

( 



Arrest, negro liable to, 55 ; by army offi- 
cers, 79. 

Articles of Confederation, fugitive slave 
clause in, 7, 13, 91 (No. 8). 

Articles of war, resolution on, 120 (No. 
47) ; bill for an additional, 79. 

Artis, Jordan, advertisement of, 56. 

Ashley, repeal bill, 83, 123 (No. 80). 

Athenaeum, Boston, 129 (No. 2). 

Attorneys, to defend fugitives, 66 ; for- 
bidden to act, 69. 

Attucks, Crispus, escape of, 5, 124 (No. 
6). 

BADGER, on fugitive slave bill, 32. 

Bahamas, treatment of fugitives in, 24, 
26. 

Bass, aids S. Northrup, 37. 

Batchelder, James, death of, 46. 

Bath, escape from, 127 (No. 56). 

Bell, Governor, ^ee Ohio. 

Benton Resolution, 109 (No. 24). 

Bermudas, treatment of fugitives in, 26. 

Bill, for a new fugitive slave law, re- 
ported, 17-21,24; 28-29; character of, 
1802, 19, 20 ; principles of, 1818, 20-21 ; 
for amending, 21^-22 ; on Maryland reso- 
lutions, 24; Douglas's, 118 (No. 17); 
Lovejoy's, 119 (No. 35), 122 (No. 66); 
Wilson's, 120 (Nos. 42, 48), 122 (Nos. 
54, 56) ; Howe's, 120 (No. 49) ; Davis's 
120 (No. 50), 121 (No. 57); confisca- 
tion, 1*22 (Nos. 68, 72, 73, 79) ; abolition, 
121, 122 (Nos. 62, 65) ; Harris's, 121 
(No. 59), 122 (Nos. 67, 71); Clarke's, 
122 (No. 72); Julian's, 120 (No. 45), 
122 (No. 76) ; emancipation, 122 (Nos. 
73, 75), 122, 123 (No. 78); repeal, 123 
(No. 80) ; Stevens's, I23( No. 80) ; Ash- 
ley's, 123 (No. 80) ; Sumner's, 123 
(Nos. 80, 83) ; Spalding's, 123 (No. 80); 
139) 



140 



Fugitive Slaves : — Index. 



House substitute, 123 (No. 83). See 
also Acts. 

Bingham, , on Blair bill, 79, So; res- 
olutions, 81, 119 (No. 39) ; amendments, 
121 (No. 58), 122 (No. 67). 

Black Code, in the D. C, resolution on, 
119 (No. 33); bill to rejieal, 121 (No. 
56). 

Blair, , bill, 79, So; Act, 121 (No. 58). 

Blake, , introduces repeal bill, 73. 

Boston massacre, Attucks killed in, 5, 6. 

Boston, schooner, case of, 41, 125 (No. 
21). 

Boucher, Rev. John, on Washington's 
education, 2. 

Bound servants, escape from Virginia, 9. 

Bourne, , appointed on committee, 17. 

Bowditch, H. I. See Latimer Journal. 

Boyle, , Brigadier General in Sher- 
wood case, 78. 

Bright, , Explanatory Bill, 116 (No. 

34). 

Brown, on repeal bill, 86. 

Brown, John, in Missouri and Kansas, 
51 ; plan of, 51 ; effect of raid, 84 ; case, 
128 (No. 63). 

Brown, Mary, demands arrest of Hamlet, 

43. 44- 
Browne, William, story of escapes, 9. 
Browne, William, a runaway, 57. 
Buchanan, James, presidential message of, 

72, 117 (No. i). 
Burnett, Governor, conference with In- 
dians, demands slave, 8. 
Burns, Anthony, arrest and trial, 45, 55, 

127; use of court house in his case, 6S, 

(No. 57). 
Butler, , proposition on fugitive slave 

clause, 14; on fugitive slave bill, 32; 

reports fugitive slave bill, no (No. 

30)- 
Butler, General B. F., on " contrabands," 

74- 

CALHOUN, Resolution, 27, 108 (No. 

20). . 
California, sanctions rendition, 67. 
Calvert, appointed on committee, made 

chairman, 17. 
Cape May, escapes to, 124 (No. 3). 



Carlisle, fugitive slave case in, 39. 

Cases, legal, change in character of, 34; 
classification of, 35 ; principle of selec- 
tion of, 43. 

Certificate, evidence for conviction, 7. 

Chandler, Zachary, introduces confiscation 
bill, 75 ; confiscation act, 119 (No. 31). 

Chase, S. P., on fugitive slave law, 32 ; on 
payments under law of 1850, 116 (No. 
38) ; offers amendments, in (No. 30). 

Cherokees. See Treaty. 

Chickasavvs. See Treaty. 

Chickasaw case, 38, 39, 125 (No. 20). 

Christiana case, 50, 51, 127 (No. 49) ; influ- 
ence traced, 50, 51. 

Choctaws. See Treaty. 

Clarence, , joint resolution, 118 (No. 

23)- 

Clark, , reports confiscation bill, 76; 

substitute, 77; resolution, 119 (No. 34) ; 
amendments, 120 (No. 51) ; 122, 123 (No. 
78) ; confiscation bill, 122 (No. 72). 

Clarke, J. F., quoted, 43, 46, 58, 62. 

Clay, Henry, see Gallatin, provision on 
fugitives, 30; on Shadrach case, 48, 115 
(No. ^-i^) ; amendment, in (No. 30). 

Cochrane, joint resolution, 117 (No. 2). 

Colfax, Schuyler, resolution, 122 (No. 77). 

Collamer, , amendments, 121 (No. 

53); 122 (No. 67). 

Colonial regulation, began early, 2; cases, 
1-12 ; legislation, 89-103. 

Colonists, runaway, 92 (No. 15). 

Colony, of fugitives, 57. 

Columbia, case in, 125 (No. 15). 

Comet case, 26. 

Commissioners, of United Colonies, com- 
plain of fugitives, 10; duty of, 31. 

Committee, for a new fugitive slave law, 
17 ; on the fugitive slave law, 17-23, 27 ; 
on Maryland resolution, 24 ; to prevent 
outrages, 41 ; conference, 77 ; amend- 
ments by, 119 (No. 31), 120 (Nos. 48, 
51); on judiciary, instructed, 29; re- 
port a fugitive slave law, 29. 

Compromise, resolution affirming, 116 
(No. 35); fugitive slave act, 118 (No. 

25). 

Conferences, between Indians and the 
Governor of New York, 8. 



Bin chain — Eldridjre. 



141 



Confiscation, of slaves of rebels, 74; re- 
port on, 121 (No. 60); bill, 75, 76; 
amendments, 75 ; provisions extended, 
75, 76; presented, 75, 76; act approved 
by President, 77 ; Trumbull's, 119 (Nos. 
30, 37), 120 (No. 52); Chandler's, 119 
(No. 31) ; Davis's, 120 (No. 50) ; 
coupled with emancipation, 120 (No. 
44), 122 (Nos. 69, 73) ; amendments to, 
121, (No. 57), 123 (Nos. 67, 71); 
Harris's, 121, 122 (Nos. 59, 63, 67, 
71) ; Clark's, 122 (No. 72) ; progress of, 
123 (No. 79) ; Morrill's joint resolution, 
119 (No. 40). 
Congress, action of, from 1847 to 1S50, 28, 

29. 
Connecticut, legislation in, 4 ; in the 
New England confederation, 7 ; offers 
reward, 8; emancipation in, 13; Per- 
sonal Liberty Lav/s in, 65, 66, 69; 
servants in, 91 (No. 9) ; against runa- 
ways, 100 (No. 67), 103 (Nos. 78, 

79)- 

Constitution, fugitive slave clause in, 16, 
105 (No. 7); defended slavery, 16; 
amendments proposed, 118 (No. 22). 

Constitutional Convention, fugitive ques- 
tion in, 14, 15. 

Contrabands, origin of term, 74. 

Convention, in Treaty of Ghent, 25. See 
also Constitutional Convention. 

Conviction of a fugitive, evidence neces- 
sary, 18, 19. 

Cooledge, N., in Latimer case, 39. 

Court, Commissioners, how chosen, 30. 
See also Conviction, Trials. 

Court-house assaulted, 49, 58. 

Cowden, Colonel, in Wisdom case, 78. 

Cox, , resolution, 117 (No. 5) ; on re- 
peal bill, 84. 

Crafts, William and Lucy, escape of, 59, 
60, 126 (No. 41). 

Creek Lidians, escapes to, 8 ; treaty with, 
24 ; restoration clause in treaty, 106 
(No. II). 

Creole, case of, 27. 

Crittenden, joint resolution, 118 (Nos. 13, 
24). 

Curtis, Commissioner, 44. 

Curtis, Judge, trial of, 46. 



DAGGET amendment, 20, 107 (No. 14)- 
Dana, R. H., defends Burns, 46. 
Daniel, offered for sale, 57. 
Davis, amendment, iii (No. 30) ; bill, 120 
(No. 50) ; substitute bill, 121 (No. 57) ; 
amendments, 121 (No 58). 
Davis, Charles G., in Shadrach case, 47 

48. 
Dayton amendment, in (No. 30). 
Debate, on fugitive slave clause in the 
constitution, 14, 15; on fugitive slave 
bill, 17-20; on the slave trade, 20; on 
the fugitive slave act, 20, 22 ; on the ad- 
mission of Missouri, 23 ; on slavery in 
the D. C, 29; on the fugitive slave 
law of 1850, 31-33. 
De Bere, John, in Shadrach case, 47. 
Delaware, regulation of servants and 

slaves, loi (No. 70). 
Delawares, fugitive slave clause in treaty, 

104 (No. i). 
Diggs, S. T. P., in Anderson case, 26. 
Dismal Swamp, refuge for fugitive, 57. 
District of Columbia, slavery in, 29 ; re- 
peal of jail laws in, 80, 82 ; Grimes's bill, 
81, 82; debate on abolition of slavery 
in, 82; resolution on repeal of the 
Black Code in, 119 (No. 33); bill for 
emancipation in, 120 (No. 42) ; act on 
criminal justice in, 120 (No. 51); bill, 
121 (No. 54) ; bill to repeal Black Code 
in, 121 (No. 56); bill for the abolition 
of slavery in, 121, 122 (Nos. 62, 65). 

Drayton, , Captain, aids fugitives, 42. 

Drayton and Sayres, case of, 42; 126 

(No 40). 
Douglass, Frederick, method of escape, 

58, 64, 125 (No. 23). 
Douglas, Stephen A., joint resolution, 118 

(No. 14). 
Dutch Colonies, along the coast, i ; regu- 
lations on fugitives, 2, 4 ; legislation in, 
6. See also New Amsterdam, New 
Netherlands. 

EAST JERSEY, against fugitives, 2, 3, 
95,96 (No. 41); against runaways, 96 

(No. 45)- 
Eldridge, Captain, of brig Chickasaw, 

38, 39. 



142 



Fugitive Slaves : — Index. 



Eliot, , introduces confiscation bill, 

76; bill, 122 (No. 69); substitute bill, 
122 (No. 78). 

Elton, Governor, action in fugitive slave 
case, 10. 

Emancipation, in Great Britain, 26 ; reso- 
lutions on, 76; in the District of Co- 
lumbia, 120 (No. 42); bill, 122 (No. 
75) ; coupled with confiscation, 120 
(No. 44); 122 (Nos. 69, 73); of fugi- 
tives from disloyal masters, bill for, 122 
(No. 78). 

Emancipation proclamation, effect of, as a 
war measure, 77. 

Encomium, case of, 24. 

England. See Great Britain. 

English, , joint resolution, 117 (No. 8). 

English colonies, i. See Colonies. 

Enterprise, case of, 24. 

Escape, by ferries, 4, 5 ; methods of in- 
vestigation of, 53 ; methods of, 53 ; mo- 
tives for, 54 ; to the woods, 56, 57 ; to 
the North, 57 ; by laundry work, 58 ; by 
coach, 58, 59; by passports, 63, 75; 
general effect of, 64 ; from English to 
French, 124 (No. 5). See also Fugi- 
tives, Runaways. 

Extradition, no system of, in the colo- 
nies, 9. 

FALSE TESTIMONY, punished, 70. 
Faneuil Hall, mass meetings in, 40, 45, 

55- 

Fee, of commissioners, 30. 

Felons, runaway apprentices, 90 (No. 4). 

Felony, when guilty of, 69. 

Ferries, escapes by, 4, 5. 

Fessenden, , requests investigation of 

the District of Columbia jail, 81, 119 
(No. 38). 

Fitch, , resolutions affirming the Com- 
promise, 116 (No. 35). 

Florence, .joint resolutions, iiS (Nos. 

15, 18). 

Florida, escapes to, 8 ; Seminole trouble 
in, 25. 

Fortress Monroe, contrabands at, 74. 

French colonies, interval of unpopulated 
country south, i ; refuse to return fugi- 
tives, II. 



Free negroes, penalty for harboring fugi- 
tives, 4 ; condition of, 27. 

Free States, difficulty of transporting 
slaves across, 36. 

Friendship, ship, case of, 6, 126 (No. 
10). 

Frontiers, places of refuge, 25. 

Fugitive apprentices, act applies to, iS. 
See also servants. 

Fugitives, evidence to convict, 19; status 
on the high seas, 26; penalty for harbor- 
ing, 31, 103 (No. 80) ; pursuit interfered 
with, 38 ; length of journevs, 57, 58 ; 
disguised as whites, 58, 59; how con- 
ducted on the underground railroad, 
61 ; in loyal slave states, 77, 78 ; typical 
cases of, during the war, 78 ; arrests of, 
by civil officers, advertisement of, 80 ; 
entertainment of, 90 (No. 6) ; against, 
91 (Nos. II, 12); resolution for the 
discharge of, 119 (No. 32) ; bill to pre- 
vent return of, 119 (No. 35) ; resolution 
against the return of, 120 (Nos. 43, 46) ; 
bill on the arrest of, by army and navy 
officers, 120 (No. 48); act to prohibit 
return by the army, 121 (No. 58); reso- 
lution on the return of, by the army and 
navy, bill on the return of, by the army, 
resolution demanding trial by jury for, 
121, 122 (Nos. 61, 66, 77); bill for 
the emancipation of fugitives from dis- 
loyal masters, 122, 123 (No. 78). See 
also Runaways, Escapes ; see Table of 
Contents. 

Fugitive Slaves, appeal for, 19 ; status of 
question from 1823 to 1847, 22, 25 ; res- 
olutions on, 78 ; question discussed, 78, 
79 ; arrest by army officers, 79 ; reso- 
lutions on the return of, resolution on 
army orders on, 119 (Nos. 28, 36); res- 
olution on, 122 (No. 74) ; sources of in- 
formation on, general histories of, 129 
(Nos. I, 3) ; secondary sources of infor- 
mation on, original sources of informa- 
tion on, autobiographies of, records of 
trials of, periodicals and newspapers 
upon, 1 29-131 (Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7, 11) ; ma- 
terials for study of legislation upon, 131, 
132 (No. 12). See also Escapes, Fugit- 
ives, Runaways, and Table of Contents. 



Eliot — Harris. 



143 



Fugitive Slave Act, first (1793)- i^, 17; 
fi'rst called for, 17; necessity of the act, 
17; passed the Senate, passed the 
House, 17 ; signed by the President, 
18 ; text, 105, 106 (No. 9) ; followed 
earlier examples, 17, 18; status of 
opinion on, 17, 18 ; remained inoper- 
ative, 16, 17; to enforce the, no (No. 
29). 
Fugitive Slave Act, second (1850), at- 
tempts to secure, 21, 24; secured, 29, 
30; introduced by Mason, 29, no 
(No. 30); Webster proposes, ni (No. 
30); substitute offered, ni (No. 30); 
passed Congress, 29, 30 ; necessity of, 
urged, 31 ; arguments for, 31, 32 ; argu- 
ments against, 32, 33 ; provisions of, 30, 
31 ; text of, n2 (No. 31) ; unpopularity 
of, 43, 51 ; "o moral foundation, 43; 
declared unconstitutional, 71 ; non-exe- 
cution of, 72 ; resolution to amend, 120 

(No. 45)- 
Fugitive Slave Acts repealed (1864), re- 
p°eal urged, 72 ; status of, 83 ; early prop- 
ositions, 83; discussion, 83; repeal bill, 
83 ; passed, 85 ; repeal bill discussed, 
84-i'6 ; bill to amend, n8 (No. 25) ; re- 
peal bills, 120 (No. 49)> I" (No. 76), 
126 (Nos. 80, 82) ; repeal bill passes, 
86; te.xt of, 86, 87 ; 124 (No. 83). 
Fugitive Slave Bill of 1818, passed the 
House, 20-22 ; title of, 22 ; failure in 
the Senate, 23. 
Fugitive Slave Cases. See Table of Con- 
tents. 
Fugitive Slave Clause, in the New Eng- 
land Articles of Confederation, 7 ; in the 
Constitution, 14-16; in the Treaty of 
Ghent, 24, 106 (No. 12). 
Fugitive Slave Controversy, educating 

effect of, recapitulation of, 87, 88. 
Fugitive Slave Legislation, opposed by 
Northern States, 28 ; inadequacy of, 
proved, 28 ; necessity of more stringent, 
26, 28 ; proposition for new, 29 ; must 
be carried out, 42 ; new element in, 66; 
in i860, 71 ; resistance to, declared felo- 
ny, 72, 73 ; propositions to repeal or 
amend, 73 ; after emancipation procla- 
mation, 77. 



GALLATIN, ALBERT, in Treaty of 

Ghent, 25. 
Gannett, case of, 126 (No. 44). 
Gansey, Isaac, case of, 125 (No. 24). 
" Gap Gang," aid kidnappers, 50. 
Gardiner, , commissioner in Hamlet 

case, 43, 44- 
Garner, Margaret, flight and seizure, 47. 
Garner, Robert, flight and seizure, 47. 
Garner, Simeon, flight and seizure, 47; 

case 128 (No. 58). 
Garrett, Thomas, trial and fine, reward 

offered for, 63. 
Gatchell case, 128 (No. 61). 
Georgia, difficulty in recovery of fugitives 

in, 8; Governor of, demands fugitives 

from justice, 41. 
Gibson case, 126 (No. 45). 
Giddings resolution, 29, 109 (Nos. 23, 25) ; 

resolution, no (Nos. 27, 28). 
Glasgow, freedom case in, 12, 124 (No. 

7)- 

Glocester, given jurisdiction over run- 
aways, 93 (No 24). 

Glover case, 127 (No. 55). 

Goin case, 126 (No. 29). 

Gorsuch, Edward, claims a fugitive, 50. 

Grahame, Thomas, in freedom case, 12. 

Grayson, , on fugitive slave clause, 

15- 

Great Britain, status of fugitives in, n, 12 ; 
diplomatic relations, n, 12; encourage- 
ment of fugitives, 24, 25 ; pays indem- 
nity, 26. See also England. 

Great Dismal Swamp, refuge for run- 
aways, 57. 

Grey, James B., demands a fugitive, 39. 

Grimes, criminal justice bill, 81 ; act, 120 
(No. 51) ; amendments, 121 (No. 64), 122 
(No.74)- 

HALE, , resolution, 79, 1 20 (No. 41 ) ; 

amendment, 123 (No. 82). 

jjall, , resolution, 29, 109 (No. 26). 

Hamlet, James, case, 43, 44. 126 (No. 43). 
Hannum, Captain, in Ottoman case, 40. 
Hanway, Castner, in Christiana case, 50, 

51- 

Harlan, , amendment, 120 (No. 51). 

Harris, , introduces confiscation bill, 



144 



Fugitive Slaves : — Index. 



76; confiscation bill, 121 (No. 59), 122 
(Nos. 67, 71); amendment, 121 (No. 
64). 

Hartford, fugitive harbored in, 10; treaty 
of, ratified, 91 (No. 14) ; controversy 
with New Netherlands, 124 (No. i). 

Harvard College, Library of, 129 (No. 2). 

Henderson amendment, 123 (No. 82). 

Hepburne, Judge, in Kennedy case, 39. 

Higginson, T. W., in Burns case, 45, 46. 

Hilliard, Mrs. G. S., harbors a fugitive, 
64. 

Hillyer, , finality resolution, 116 (No. 

37)- 
Hindman, , proposition, 72 ; joint 

resolution, 117 (No. 10). 
Holmes, , on the fugitive slave bill, 

22. 

Howard, , amendment, 123 (No. 82). 

Howe, , repeal bill, S3, 120 (No. 

49)- 
Hubbard, , on repeal bill, 84,85; res- 
olution, 123 (No. 83). 

ILLINOIS, no full personal liberty law 
in, 67. 

Immigration, into Missouri, 23. 

Impeachment, ground for, 69. 

Imprisonment of a runaway, 56. 

Indented Servants. See Servants. 

Indiana, personal liberty law in (1824), 65, 
67. 

Indians, received fugitives in the wilder- 
ness, I ; as slaves, 2 ; as slave hunters, 
8 ; conferences with, 8 ; escapes to, 9. 
See Chickasaws, Choctaws, Creeks, Del- 
awares, Seminoles. 

Intercolonial cases, early agreements as to 
fugitives, 1,2; agreement between the 
Dutch and English, 7 ; difficulty of ar- 
ranging regulations, 7 ; first contained 
in Articles of Confederation, 7 ; depend- 
ent upon intercolonial feeling, 9; case 
of escape of slaves, 11. 

Interferences and rescues, 38. 

International cases, earliest, 10 ; relations 
unsettled, 9, 10; regulations under the 
Articles of Confederation, 12, 13. 

Interstate relations, affected by Prigg de- 
cision, 41. 



Iowa, personal liberty laws in, 67. 
Iredell, on fugitive slave clause, 15. 
Isaac, case of, 41, 124 (No. 24). 

JACKSON, , resolution, 116 (No. 

36)- 

Jager, Cornells Herperts de, escape of 
servants of, 6, 7. 

Jail, in the District of Columbia, resolu- 
tion on, 80 ; denied to fugitives, So, 
81, no (Nos. 27, 28). See District 
of Columbia. 

Jails, State, not to be used, 40, ; denied to 
fugitives, 47 ; denial constitutional, 70 ; 
use forbidden, 69. See also Personal 
Liberty Bill. 

Jefferson, Thomas, proposition, 13. 

John case, 17, 124 (No. 11). 

Johnson, on committee, 17; joint resolu- 
tion, 118 (Nos. 12, 27); amendment, 
124 (No. 83). 

Johnson Case, 12S (No. 60). 

Jones, George, case, 36, 37, 125 (No. 19). 

Julian, George W., repeal bills, 83, 122 
(No. 76), 123 (No. 80) ; resolution, 120 
(No. 45). 

Jury trial, not admitted, 7 ; disuse of, 66. 

KANSAS, personal liberty laws in, 67, 
70. 

Kellogg, , joint resolution, 118 (Nos. 

19, 20, 21). 

Kennedy case, 39, 126 (No. 35). 

Kentucky, resolutions, 25; petition of 
Legislature, 28 ; demands extradition 
of abettors of fugitives, 41 ; contro- 
versy with Ohio, 126 (No. 37). 

Kidnapping, suggests new fugitive slave 
law, 17; from 1793 to 1850, 27 ; in bor- 
der States, 27 ; character of cases, 
36; enlists sympathy, 60; regulations 
against, 82. 

Kilgore, resolution, 73, 118 (No. 11). 

King, , on repeal bill, 84. 

Kirk case, 126 (No 33). 

Kline, Marshal, demands assistance, 50, 

L'AMISTAD case, 27. 
Latimer, George, case of, 39, 125 (No. 
2S) ; effect, 6S ; daily journal, 40. 



Harris — Negroes. 



145 



LgP^j^e, Joint resolution, 117 (No. 9). 

Le Screux, slave on, 11. 

Lewis case, 127 (No. 54). 

Lewis, Elijah, prosecution of, 50, 51, 127 
(No. 49). 

Liberator, kidnapping case in, 82. See 
Newspapers. 

Liberty, love of, by slaves, 54. 

Liberty Party, convention of, 49. 

Libraries, use of, 129 (No. 2). 

Lincoln, President, preliminary proclama- 
tion, 77; final emancipation procla- 
mation, 77. 

List, counsel in Shadrach case, 47. 

Loring, Ellis Gray, in Shadrach case, 47; 
Crafts taken to house of, 60. 

Louisiana, escape of slaves from, 23. 

Lovejoy, bills, 78, 79, 119 (No. 35), 122 
(No. 66) ; resolutions, 119 (No. 29), 120 
(No. 44) ; amendment, 119 (No. 3S). 

MADISON, on fugitive slave clause, 

Maine, Governor of, refuses to surrender 
fugitives from justice, 41 ; personal 
liberty law in, 69. 

Malbronne, Ensign de, loses servant, 11. 

Mallory, , on Blair bill, 79; on repeal, 

84. 
Manhattan, escape to, 6, 124 (No. 2). 
Mansfield, Lord. See Somersett case. 
Market women, on Underground Rail- 
road, 63. 
Maryland, regulations on fugitives, 3 ; 
offers reward, 7 ; letter from, to New 
Netherlands, 10, n ; fugitives escape 
from, 10, 11; resolution, 24; resolu- 
tions debated, 24, 107 (No. iS) ; of- 
fers reward for Thomas Garrett, 63; 
regulations against runaways, 90 (No. 
4), 91 (Nos. u, 12), 93 (Nos. 26, 2S), 
94 (No. 31), 95 (Nos. 38, 40). 
Mason, of Massachusetts, on the fugitive 

slave bill, 22. 
Mason, of Virginia, fugitive slave bill, 29, 
30, no (No. 30) ; amendment, 29; 
argument, 31. 
Massachusetts Bay, regulation against 
transportation of apprentices and ser- 
vants, 99 (No. 63) ; on the capture of 



servants in, 89 (No. 2) ; regulation of 
free negroes, 98 (No. 53). 

Massachusetts Colony, first law as to 
fugitives, 4 ; in the New England Con- 
federation, 7 ; emancipation in, 13 ; first 
fugitive slave case in, 35. 

Massachusetts State, Governor of, ad- 
vised, 68 ; personal liberty law, 66, 67, 
68; no recovery of fugitives in, 71. 

May, S. J., in "Jerry "case, 49. 

McClernand, ,117 (No. 9). 

McHenry, "Jerry," case, 48, 49, 127 (No. 

50- 

McLanahan, , resolution, 1 1 5 ( No. 32 ) . 

jyieade, , proposition, 29 ; resolution, 

no (No. 29). 
Meionaon, mass meetings in, 45. 
Merrill, Amos B., in Latimer case, 39. 
Mexico, as a place of refuge, 25. 
Michigan, personal liberty laws in, 67, 

70. 
Miller, in kidnapping case, 51, 127 (No. 

50). 
Miner, Jo, advertisement of, 80. 
Minnesota, personal liberty law in, 67. 
Missouri, admission of, 23; Anderson 

case in, 26 ; Governor of, offers reward 

for John Brown, 51. 
Missouri Compromise, fugitive slave 

clause in, 23, 107 (No. 16) ; period of, 

23- 
Mob, provisions against, 31. 
Morgan, Margaret. See Prigg Case. 

Morrill, , resolution, n9 (No. 40). 

Morris, cutter, in Burns case, 46, 55. 
Morris, , substitute reported, 83 ; on 

repeal bill, 85 ; resolution, n7 (No. 3) ; 

joint resolution, n8 (No. 16). 
Morris, John B., demands a fugitive slave, 

39- 
" Moses." See Harriet Tubman, 

Murray, , motion, 19. 

NALLE CASE, 128 (No. 64). 

Nassau, fugitives in, 27. 

Negroes, ignorance of, 57 ; regulation of, 
100 (No. 65) ; against escape of, 103 
(No. 78) ; petition of a soldier, 20 ; 
free, how affected, 21 ; regulation of, 
98 (No. 53). See also Fugitives. 



T46 



Fuzitive Slaves : — Index. 



New Amsterdam, escape of servants 
from, 67 ; trial at, 9. See also New 
Netherlands. 

New England, regulations as to fugi- 
tives, 4. 

New England Confederation, composition 
of, 7, 8 ; articles of, 91 (No. S). 

New Hampshire, legislation in, 4, 99 (No. 
61) ; personal liberty laws in, 67, 
69. 

New Haven, in the New England Con- 
federation, 7. 

New Jersey, regulations on fugitives, 3, 
94 (No. 32), 95 (No. 39), 96 (No. 42) ; 
sanctions rendition, 67; slaves, 98 (No. 
55) ; white servants, 98 (No. 56). 

New Netherlands, legislation in, 4 ; on 
fugitive slave cases, 11 ; regulations 
against runaways, 89 (No. i), 89, 90 (No. 
3), 90 (No. 5), 91 (Nos. 10, 14), 92 (No. 
19); Quakers, 93 (No. 29) ; contro- 
versy with Hartford, 126 (No. i). See 
also Dutch Colonies. 

New York, regulation on fugitives, 8, 97 
(No. 50), 98 (No. 51), 99 (No. 59); 
Governor of, in Solomon Northrup 
case, 37, 38 ; refusal to return abettors 
of fugitives, 41 ; personal liberty laws, 
66, 69, 70; slaves, 97 (No. 49); pre- 
vention of insurrections, loi (No. 68) ; 
kidnapping in, 82. 

Niblack, , resolution, 117 (No. 7). 

Nicholson, on committee, 20. 

Norfolk, kidnapping cases in, 82, 12S ; 
(No. 68). 

©BERLIN CASE, 38, 125 (No. 26). 

Oberlin-Wellington, rescue, 49, 50, 128 
(No. 62). 

Officers, return of fugitives by army and 
navy, 121 (No. 53). 

Ohio, fugitjves protected in, 23 ; refusal 
to return abettors of fugitives, 41 ; per- 
sonal liberty law, 67, 70. 

Olmsted, F. L., quoted, 56. 

"Omnibus Bill," fugitive slave provision 
in, 30. 

Ordinance of 1787, for the Northwest 
Territory, 13, 14; confirmed, 16. 

Ottoman case, 40, 126 (No. 34). 



PARKER, THEODORE, speaks on 
Burns' case, 45 ; indicted for riot, 46 ; 
protects William and Lucy Crafts, 59, 
60. 

Parker, William, in Christiana case, 

50- 

Pass, necessity of, 55. 

Patrols, duty of, 55. 

Patroons, runaways from, 89 (No. i). 

Peace Convention, amendment, 118 (No. 
22). 

Pearl, carries fugitives, 42. 

Penalties for escape, 31 ; for violating 
personal liberty laws, 67. 

Pennsylvania, emancipation in, 13; Gov- 
ernor of, in "John" case, 17; act of, 
reported, 23, 107 (No. 17) ; fugitives 
abetted in, 24 ; personal liberty laws 
in, 66, 69 ; regulation of servants, 97 
(No. 48) ; regulation of negroes, 100 
(No. 65); harboring of fugitives, 103 
(No. 80); case in, 126 (No. 46). 

Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of 
Slavery, efforts in behalf of " John," 
17 ; petition of, 21 ; efforts of, 28. 

Pensacola, Walker embarks from, 42. 

Personal Liberty Laws, passed, 28 ; char- 
acter of, 65 ; before the Prigg decision, 
65 ; between the Prigg decision and the 
Second Fugitive Slave Law, 66 ; oc- 
casioned by the law of 1850, 66, 67 ; 
change in character, 66; table of, 67; 
distribution among States, 67 ; report 
on, 68; effect of, 70, 102; constitution- 
ality of, 70; obstruction b)', 71 ; repeal 
urged, 72 ; resolution against, 72 ; 
Saulsbury substitute on, 123 (No. 81). 

Petition of North Carolina negroes, 19; 
of free negroes, 20 ; of a free colored 
so'dier, 20 ; of the Pennsylvania Aboli- 
tion Society 21 ; frorh the Kentucky 
Legislature, 28 ; to remove jailer and 
sheriff in Latimer case, 40 ; for an amend- 
ment to the Constitution, 40; for a new 
personal liberty law, 68. 

Philadelphia, constitutional convention 
sits in, 14; attempted rescue in, 39, 125 
(No. 22). 

Phillips, Wendell, speeches on Latimer 
case, 40 ; addresses mass meeting, 45; 



New Amsterdam — Rhode Island. 



147 



speaks on Burns' case, 45 ; indicted 
for riot, 46. 

Pierce, Franklin, President, sends execu- 
tive message, 48 ; issues proclamation, 
48. 

Pindall, on revision of the fugitive slave 
act, 21 ; made chairman of committee, 
21 ; amendatory bill, 106 (No. 10). 

Pine Grove Plantation, probable refuge, 
57, 66. 

Pinkney, Gen. C. C., on the fugitive slave 
clause, 14. 

Plymouth, in the New England Confede- 
ration, 7. 

Pomeroy, , on confiscation bill, 76. 

Porter, , amendment, 122 (No. 67). 

Potter, R. J., advertisement by, So. 

Powell, , on District of Columbia jail, 

81; joint resolution, 119 (No. 28); 
amendment, 120 (No. 51). 

Pratt, , amendment, iii (No. 30). 

Priggs vs. Pennsylvania case, 27, 28, 125 
(No. iS) ; consequences of, 66 ; extracts 
from, 108 (No. 22). 

Proclamation, by West India Company, 
10 ; on Shadrach case, 48 ; emanci- 
pation, 77. 

Prosecutions, carried on, 42 ; after 
"Jerry" rescue, 49; of Oberlin- Well- 
ington rescuers, 50 ; of Wendell 
Phillips, 46. 

Protection papers, use of, 58. 

Pugh, George H., joint resolution, 118 
(No. 26). 

Purrington, brig William, 126 (No. 39). 

Purvis, Robert, connection with Under- 
ground Railroad, 63. 

QUAKERS, arrange station on the 
Underground Railroad, 60 ; fugitives 
hidden by, 61 ; refused admision to 
New Netherlands, 93 (No. 29). 

Quincy, Josiah, account of first fugitive 
slave case in the North, 35, 125 (No. 



RAIDS, upon plantations, 56. 
Rantoul, Robert, Jr., in Sims case, 44. 

Read, , on committee, 17. 

Redemptioners, described, 2 ; cases 



of, 2 ; case of running away with ne- 
groes, 3. 

Refuge, place of, 57. 

Rendition, a duty, 7. See also Fugi- 
tives. 

Rescue, first case of, 35. 

Resolution, by Maryland Legislature, 
23, 24 ; on relations with Canada, 25 ; 
Kentucky, 25; on fugitives on the 
high seas, 26 ; Giddings, 29 ; against , 
the return of Latimer, 40 ; to base 
representation on free persons, 40; 
Georgia Legislature, 41 ; on arrests 
by army otificers, 79 ; Fitch, 116 
(No. 35); Jackson, 116 (No. 36); 
Hillyer, 116 (No. 37); Chase, 116 
(No. 38); Cochrane's joint, 117 (No. 
2); Morris, 117 (No. 3); Leake, 117 
No. 4); Cox, 117 (No. 5); Stevenson, 

117 (No. 6); Niblack, 117 (No. 7); 
English joint, 117 (No. 8) ; McClernand 
joint, 117 (No. 9); Hindman, 117 (No. 
10); Kilgore, 118 (No. 11); Johnson's 
joint, 118 (Nos. 12, 27); Crittenden's 
joint, 118 (No. 13); Douglas's joint, 118 
(No. 14) ; Florence, u8 (Nos. 15, 18) ; 
Morris's joint, 118 (No. 16); Kellogg's 
joint, 118 (Nos. 19, 20, 21) ; Clarence's 
joint, 118 (No. 23); Crittenden's joint, 

118 (No. 24); Pugh's joint, 118 (No. 
26); Powell's joint, 119 (No. 28); 
Lovejoy's, 119 (No. 29); Wilson's 119 
(Nos. 32, 33), 120 (No. 47), 121 (No. 
55), 121 (No. 61) ; Clark, 119 (No. 34) ; 
Sumner, 119 (No. 36); Fessenden, 119 
(No. 38) ; Bingham, 119 (No. 39)'; 
Morrill's confiscation joint, 119 (No. 
40); Hale, 120 (No. 41) ; Sumner, 120 
(No. 43), 122 (No. 74) ; Lovejoy, 120 
(No. 44) ; Julian, 120 (No. 45) ; Shank, 
120 (No. 46) ; Colfax, 122 (No. 77) ; 
Hubbard's repeal, 123 (No. 83). 

Revolution, did not change condition of 
slave, 13. 

Reward, offered by Missouri, 51 ; by 
United States, 52; by colonies, 7, 8. 

Rhode Island legislation, 4 ; emanci- 
pation, 13; personal liberty law, 66, 
67, 69 ; regulation of ferries in, 98 (No. 
57). 



148 



Fiizitive Slaves : — Index. 



Rice, , amendment, 121 (No. 53). 

Rice, John, kidnapped, 49. 

Rich, on the fugitive slave bill, 21. 

Riker, Richard, in Jones case, 37. 

Riley, , United States commissioner, 

47- 

Rotch, aids escape, 6. 

Runaways, regulations against, 6, 7, S; 
easily regulated, 7; the habitual, 57; 
methods pursued, 58; harboring upon 
a ship, 58 ; regulations against, 89 
(Nos. I, 3), 90 (Nos. 4, 7), 92 {No. 
17). 93 (Nos. 24, 25, 27), 94 (Nos. 31, 
33), 95 (No. 40), 98 (No. 52), 99 (No. 
61), 100 (No. 6); entertainment of, 
91 (No. 10), 92 (No. 16), 93 (No. 29), 
94 (No. 37), 102 (No. 73) ; second 
offence, how punished, 91 (No. 13) ; 
hue and cry after, 92 (No. 18); from 
the Dutch, 93 (No. 21); apprehension 
of, 93 (No. 22) ; English, 93 (No. 23) ; 
in Glocester, 93 (No. 24) ; apprehen- 
sion of, 95 (Nos. 35, 38) ; capture re- 
warded, 95 (No. 37); prevention of, 
96 (No. 42); to Canada, 97, 98 (No. 
50) ; trade with, inhibited, 97 (No. 47) ; 
against ferriage of, 98 (No. 57), 102 
(No. 4) ; minor, 99 (No. 61) ; pursuit 
of, 103 (No. 79). 

Russia, Emperor of, arbitration by, 25. 

SAULSBURY, amendments, 120 (No. 

51), 121 (Nos. 53, 58), 122 (No. 70), 

123 (Nos. 81, 82, 83). 
Savannah Georgian, advertisement in, 57, 

66. 
Secrecy, observed by fugitives, 63. 

Sedgwick, , on committee, 17. 

Seizure, of North Carolina negroes, 19. 

See also Arrest, Kidnapping Cases. 
Seminoles, steal slaves, 24 ; trouble, 25 ; 

United States claims on, 108 (No. 19). 
Sergeant, , on the fugitive slave bill, 

22. 
Servants, English, 93 (Nos. 25, 28); an 

act concerning, 99 (No. 60) ; regulation 

of, 98 (No. 56), loi (No. 70), loi (No. 

7i) ; fugitive, 91 (No. 9), 92 (No. 19), 

93 (No. 21), 94 (No. 32), 95 (Nos. 39, 

41 ), 96 (No. 45), 100 (No. 67), 103 (No. 



78) ; how to know a, 92 (No. 20). See 
also Fugitives, Runaways. 
Sewall, Samuel E., counsels fugitives, 39, 

47- 

Seward, W. H., amendments, 29, iii 
(No. 30). 

Shadrach case, 47, 48 ; personal liberty 
laws tested, 68 ; Clay's resolution on, 
115 (No. 33); case, 127 (No. 48). 

Shank, , resolution, 120 (No. 46). 

Shanley vs. Haney case, 124 (No. 8). 

Shaw, Chief Justice, in Latimer case, 39. 

Shell, O. P., advertises a runaway, 56. 

Sheriff, power of, 31. 

Sherman, John, amendments, 86, 123 
(No. 82). 

Sherman, Roger, on the fugitive slave 
clause, 14; on committee, 18. 

Sherwood, Major, case of servant of, 78, 
128 (No. 67). 

Ship, refuge for runaways, 58 ; slave on 
Brazilian, 126 (No. 36). 

Ship-masters, Dutch, rewarded, 93 (No. 
21). 

Sims, Thomas M., case, 44 ; brigade, 
44; courthouse used as jail, 68; case, 
126 (No. 44). 

Slaves, conditions of life, 55 ; Mother's 
Farewell, extract from, 54 ; stealing of, 
102 (No. 77) ; abolition of trade in, 
21 ; status of, in England, 24; ques- 
tion of damages, 31 ; must wear livery, 
55 ; new conditions surround, 73 ; 
regulation of, 97 (No. 49), 98 (Nos. 
54> 55)> 99> 100 (Nos. 60, 64), 100 
(No. 67), loi (No. 70), Id, 102 (Nos. 
71, 72) ; extradition of, 108 (No. 21); 
status on the high seas, loS (No. 20), 
109 (No. 23) ; of the Dutch, escape to 
the English, 7 ; escape to the forest, 7, 
8 ; of rebels, resolutions on, ■]Tj ; bill to 
free, 120 (No. 52). 
Slaveholder, demand for legislation, 14; 
basis of, argued, 16 ; complaints of, 
20. 
Slave-hunters, how received, 62 ; insur- 
rections to prevent, loi (No. 68). 
Slavery, condition in the colonies, 11 ; 
interests advanced, 16; justification of, 
16 ; extinction of, 35 ; attacked in 



Rice — United Colonies. 



149 



Congress, 74 ; abolition in the District 

of Columbia, 82, 121, 122 (Nos. 62, 65) ; 

studies of the institution of, 129 (No. 

3) ; studies of colonial, 129 (No. 3) ; 

speeches upon, 131 (No. 8). 

Smith, , on fugitive slave law, 21, 22. 

Smith, Gerrit, in Anderson case, 26 ; in 

" Jerry " rescue, 49. 
Smithburg case, 126 (No. 32). 
Society for the Abolition of Slavery. See 

Pennsylvania. 
.Somersett case, 12, 124 (No. 9), 
Soule, , on the fugitive slave bill, 31, 

South Bend Case, 126 (No. 38). 

South Carolina, regulations on fugitives, 
3 ; difficulty in recovering fugitives, 8 ; 
constitutional convention in, 14^ regula- 
tions against runaways, 96 (No. 43), 97 
(No. 47), 99, 100 (Nos. 58, 62, 64) ; 
regulation of slaves, 98 (No. 54), 100 
(No. 64),ioi (No. 69), 102 (No. 77). 

Southern States, complain of Under- 
ground Railroad, 64. 

Spalding, , repeal bill, S3, 123 (No. 

80). 

Spanish colonies, interval of unpopulated 
country south, i. 

Sprague, E., 46. 

State Jails. See Jails. 

State Officers, power discussed, 20, 22 ; 
forfeiture of office, 69 ; forbidden to 
act, 66, 69. 

St. Augustine, escapes to, 8. 

St. Luc, Sieur de la Corne, negro servant 
of, II. 

Staunton, General, in Sherwood case, 78, 

94- 

Stevens, , repeal bill, 83, 123 (No. 

80) ; motion of, ill (No. 30). 

Stevenson, , resolution, 117 (No. 6). 

Stewart, . See Somersett Case. 

Story, Justice, decision in Prigg case, 28. 

Stuyvesant, Governor, in fugitive slave 
case, 10. 

Sumner, Charles, in Drayton case, 42 ; 
resolutions, 79 ; repeal bills, 83, 85, 124 
(No. 80), resolutions, 119 (No. 36), 
120 (No. 43), 120 (No. 74) ; amend- 
ment, 121 (No. 57). 



Suttle, Charles F., in Burns case, 45. 
Swain, John, suit for slave, 5. 
Swamps, as a refuge, 56, 37. 
Swan, Captain, in Wisdom case, 78. 
Swedish colonies, along the coast, I ; 

regulations on fugitives, 2. 
Syracuse, "Jerry" rescue in, 48. 

TAYLOR, , on committee, 18. 

Ten Eyck, , amendment, 120 (No. 

51) ; report of, 123 (No. So). 

Thomas case, 126 (No. 30). 

Thompson, , case, 125 (No. 27). 

Treaty, of Hartford, fugitive slave clause 
in, 91 (No. 14); of 1783, 104 (No. 2); 
with Indian tribes, 12, 13, 16, 17, 24, 
104 (Nos. I, 3, 5), 105 (No. 8), 106 (Nos. 
II, 12), 108 (No. 19); of Ghent, 24, 
106 (No. 12); proposed with Great 
Britain, 25. 

Tremont Temple, mass meetings in, 45. 

Trial, by jury, not admitted, in first act, 
19; objected to, 22; denied, 31; pro- 
posed, 73 ; resolution demanding, 122 
(No. 77). 

Trumbull, confiscation bill, 75, 119 (Nos. 
30, 37); bill, 120 (No. 52); amend- 
ments, 119 (No. 31), 121 (No. 57), 
122 (No. 78). 

Tubman, Harriet, account of, 62. 

Tukey, Marshal, in Sims case, 44. 

Turc, escape of, 9. 

UNDERGROUND RAILROAD, be- 
ginnings of, 27 ; how regarded by 
the South, 31 ; methods south of the 
Ohio, 47 ; use of, by John Brown, 51 ; 
incident at, 54; description of, 60; 
rise and growth, 60, 61 ; stations on, 
described, 61 ; methods pursued, 61 ; 
extent of system, 60, 61 ; origin of 
name, 61; in the South, 61 ; in the 
North, 61 ; colored agents on, 61, 62 ; 
prosecution of agents, 63 ; formal 
organization, 63 ; market women as 
helpers, 63. 

Underwood, , amendment, in (No. 

30). 
United Colonies, treaty with New Nether- 
lands, 91 (No. 14). 



ISO 



Fusritivc Slaves: — Index. 



United States, reward offered for John 
Brown, 51, 52; in Seminole trouble, 
24 ; in Anderson case, 26. See also 
Acts, Bills, Fugitives, Resolutions 
Runaways. 

United States Hotel, slave hunters at, 60, 
69. 

VALLANDIGHAM, C. L., amend- 
ment, iiS (No. 25), 
Van Zandt, aids fugitive, 42, 125 (No. 

25). 
Vermont, personal liberty laws in, 66, 67, 

69- 

Vigilance committee organized, 38 ; in 
" Jerry " rescue, 48. 

Villeinage, ceased in England, 11. 

Virginia, regulations on fugitives, 3; re- 
wards the recovery of a fugitive, 7, 8 ; 
slaves escape, 8 ; constitutional conven- 
tion in, 15; Governor of, action in 
"John" case, 17; demands arrest of 
abettors of a fugitive, 41 ; regulation 
against the entertainment of fugitives, 
90 (No. 6) ; regulations against run- 
aways, 90 (No. 7), 91 (No. 13), 92 
(Nos 16, 17, 18, 20), 93 (Nos. 22, 25, 
27> 30). 94 (No. 33), 95 (Nos. 35, 37), 
98 (No. 52); reward for the capture of 
runaways, 93 (No. 21), 95 (No. 36) ; on 
English runaways, 93 (No. 22); in 
county of Glocester, 93 (No. 24) ; repeal 
law, 96 (No. 44) ; amends law, 96 (No. 
48) ; amended, 100 (No. 66) ; against 
ferriage of runaways, 102 (No. 74). 

"WALKER, JONATHAN, aids fugi- 
tives, 42, 126 (No. 31). 
Walton, , amendment, 122 (Nos. 67, 

74). 

Washington, President, asks for the re- 
turn of a fugitive, 35, 125 (No. 13). 

Washington case, 38, 126 (No. 42). 



Washington, jail, resolutions on, 119 (Nos. 

32, 34, 3S, 39), 121 (No. 55). See also 

Jail. 
Webster, Daniel, in Creole case, 27 ; 

introduces bill, iii (No. 30). 
Wellington. See Oberlin-Wellington. 
West India Company, regulation of, 2 ; 

execution of regulation 6, 7 ; ordinance 

of, 89 (No. l). 
Whipping, motive for flight, 54. 

Whipple, , in kidnapping case, 35, 36. 

White, , on committee, 17. 

White slaves. See Redemptioners, Ser- 
vants. 
Whitman, , on the fugitive slave bill 

20, 22. 
Williams case, 125 (No. 17). 
Williamson case, 128 (No. 59). 
Wilkins, Frederick. See Shadrach. 
Wilson, , on Butler's proposition, 14, 

15- 

Wilson, Henry, on confiscation, 75 ; bills, 
82, 120 (Nos. 42, 48), 121 (Nos. 54, 
56); resolutions, 79,80, 119 (Nos. 32, 
ol>)' 120 (No. 47), 122 (Nos. 55, 61); 
amendment, 123 (No. 71). 

Winthrop, , amendment, iii (No. 30). 

Winthrop, Governor John, in fugitive 
slave case, 10, 11. 

Wisconsin, personal liberty laws in, 67, 
70; Supreme Court decision, 71. 

Wisdom case, 78, 128 (No. 66). 

Woodbridge resolutions, 25, 108 (No. 
21). 

Woods, as a refuge, i, 56. 

Wright, , presents Maryland Resolu- 
tion, 24. 

Writ, of habeas corpus, in Somersett 
case, 12; allowed, 22; advisability of, 
20, 22; refused, 26; issued, 38, 39; 
of personal replevin, sworn out, 39. 

YULEE, on the fugitive slave law, 32. 



POLIT ICAL SCI ENCE. 

POLITICAL SCIENCE and COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 

By John W. Burgess, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of History, Political Science, and In- 
ternational Law; Dean of the University Faculty of Political Science in Columbia 
College. Two volumes, 8vo, cloth, 7S1 pages By mail, post-paid, $5.00. Special 
terms for class use. 

The first part of the work is devoted to the general principles of political science. 
It is divided into three books. The first book treats of the nation as an ethnological 
concept; the second treats of the State, its idea, its origin, its forms, and its ends; 
the third shows the historical development of the four typical constitutions of the mod- 
ern age, — those of England, Germany, France, and the United States. 

The second part is devoted to a comparison of the provisions of these typical con- 
stitutions, and a generalization from these provisions of some fundamental principles 
of constitutional law. The three books treat: the first, of sovereignty within the con- 
stitution ; the second, of civil liberty ; and the third, which constitutes the second 
VOLUME, of government, legislative, executive, and judicial. 

The work is intended as a systematic treatise containing the results of the most 
modern thought upon the subjects treated. 

The London Times of Feb. 26 says: America sends us this week a very learned, elaborate, and sug- 
gestive work on Constitutional Law, entitled " Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law," by 
John W. Burgess, Ph.D., LL.D. . . - His work ... is full of keen analysis and suggestive comment, 
and is a noteworthy contribution to the comparative study of political science and jurisprudence. . . . Dr. 
Burgess possesses a keen insight into essential political and constitutional fact, and his work may be confi- 
dently recommended to all serious students of comparative politics and jurisprudence. 

OUR GOVERNMENT : How it grew, What it does, and How it does it. 

By Jesse Macy, Professor of History and Political Science in Iowa College. Revised 
edition. By mail, post-paid, 85 cents. 
It is the best treatise I have seen for school use upon the functions of our national, State, and local gov- 
ernment. I can heartily commend the book. — Edward IV. Bemis, Professor 0/ History and Econo- 
mics, Vanderbilt University. 

THE PHILOSOPHY OF WEALTH. 

By John B. Cl.\rk, A.M., Professor of History and Political Science in Smith College. 
By mail, post-paid, $1.10. 

RAILWAY TARIFFS AND THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE LAW. 

By Prof. Edwin R. A Seltgman, of the School of Political Science, Columbia Col- 
lege. By mail, post-paid, 75 cents. 

THE MODERN DISTRIBUTIVE PROCESS. 

By John B. Clark and Franklin H. Giddings. By mail, post-paid, 75 cents. 

SHARING THE PROFITS. 

By Mary Whiton Calkins. A sketch of things actually accomplished in this direc- 
tion. By mail, post-paid, 25 cents. 

HARVARD HISTORICAL MONOGRAPHS. 

Edited by Professors of Harvard University. 

No. I. The Veto Power. Bv Edward Campbell Mason. A.B , Instructor in Poli- 
tical Economy in Harvard University. By mail, post-paid, $1.00. 

No. 2. Introduction to the Study of Federal Government. By Albert Bush- 
NELL Hart. Ph.D., Assistant Professor of History in Harvard University. By 
mail, post-paid, $1.00. 

THE POLITICAL SCIENCE QUARTERLY. 

A Review devoted to the Historical, Statistical, and Comparative Study of Politics, 
Economics, and Public Law. Edited by the Faculty of Political Science of Col- 
umbia College. I3-00 per year. 



GINN & CO., Publishers, . - boston, new york, and Chicago. 



THE SOCIETY FOR THE COLLEGIATE 
INSTRUCTION OF WOMEN. 

("THE HARVARD ANNEX.") 



INSTRUCTION IN AMERICAN HISTORY AND 
INSTITUTIONS. 

A SYSTEMATIC coursc of instruction in American History and Insti- 
tutions is oiTered, under the joint direction of Asst. Professors Channing 
and Hart. 

I. American History to 1783. Asst. Professor Channing. 

This is a course for undergraduates or graduate students, with lectures 
and parallel reading and the preparation of topics. It is open to students 
who have taken no other history course. 

II. History of American Institutions. Asst. Professor Chantsung. 

This course is a study, from the sources, of the origin of American 
institutions and their development, to the founding of the present Constitu- 
tion in 1789. A knowledge of the annals of Colonial history is presupposed. 
It is open to graduate students or to well-equipped undergraduates. 

III. Constitutional and Political History of the United States (1783- 

1865). Asst. Professor Hart. 
This course is for undergraduates or graduates, and is open to students 
who have taken no other history courses. The work consists of lectures, 
parallel reading, and the preparation of special reports. 

IV. Government and Administration in the United States, National, 

State, and Municipal, Asst. Professor Hart. 
This course is intended only for those who have a knowledge of the 
narrative history of the country, and especially for graduates. 

V. Seminary of American History. Directed jointly by Asst. Professors 

Channing and Hart. 
This course can be taken only by students who have had systematic 
instruction in American history here or elsewhere. INIeetings will be held at 
regular intervals, and in addition each student will have a half hour of indi- 
vidual conference weekly. 

Of the above courses one of the narrative series (I. or HI.) and one of 
the descriptive and critical courses (H. or IV.) will be omitted each year. 

Students will have the use of the select working library in Fay House, 
and of the printed and manuscript collections of the Harvard College 
Library, Boston Public Library, Boston Athenaeum, Massachusetts State 
Library, and other Boston libraries. The nearly complete set of Govern- 
ment documents owned by Harvard College will be at their disposal. 

For descriptive circulars and other information address either of the 
instructors, or 

Mr. ARTHUR OILMAN, Secretary, 

Fay House, Cambridge, Mass. 



HISTORY. 



MYFRS'S Eastern Nations and Greece. Introduction price, $i. With 
full maps, illustrations, and chronological summaries. 

Far more interesting and useful than any other epitome of the kind which I have seen. — Professor 
Beckwith, Trinity College. 

A I 1 FN'S Short History of the Roman People- Introduction price, |i. 
_i___i^__^_i With full maps, illustrations, and chronological synopsis. 

The best I know of for school use — George A. IVilliams, Vermont Academy. 

MYERS ANdALA^EITS f^"«^t History for Schools and Col- 

^■i^^-.^^— i— i-^— ^^^-^^— ^^ leges- Introduction price, $1.50. This 
consists of Myers's Eastern Nations and Greece and Allen's Rome bound 
together. 

IVWFRS'S History of Rome. Introduction price, $1. With full maps, 
^^_^.^.._ illustrations, tables, and chronological summaries. This, 

bound with Myers's Eastern Nations and Greece, is Myers's Ancient 

History. Price, $1.50. 

MYERS'S ^^diseval and Modern History. Introduction price. $1.50. 
«»^^__i^^^^ With a full series of colored maps. 

Sure to be liked by teachers and pupils and by the general reader. — Professor Snow, Washington 
University. 

M YpPQ'Q General History. Introduction price, $1.50. With full maps, 
^^_^^_i^^_^ illustrations, tables, and summaries. 

The best text-book in universal history for beginners that we are acquainted with. — Professor Stearns, 
University of Wiscoftsin. 

IV\n!\!TnniV\FRY'S Leading Facts of English History. Introduc- 

I have never seen anything at all equal to it for the niche it was intended to fill. — Professor Perry, 
Williams College. 

IV\ONTnOIV\FRY'*s Leading Facts of French History- I ntroduc- 
]V\W1N 1 VJ W1V\L1\ 1 O ^j^j^ pj.j^g^ ^j_j2. With full maps and tables. 

It is a marked advance on any available work of its scope. — The Nation. 

M n M Tn n IV\ F R Y '9 Leading Facts of American History- Intro- 
m\J\\ 1 O WiVlCfX i O production price, ^i. With full maps, illustra- 
tions, tables, etc. 

It is in every way 7\dim\x3}o\t. — Professor Myers, University of Cincimtati. 

F'VIFRTON'S Introduction to the Study of the Middle Ages- In- 

troduction price, $1.12. With colored maps, original 
and adapted. 

An admirable guide to both teachers and pupils in the tangled period of which it treats. — Professor 
Fisher, Yale College. 

And many other valuable Historical Books. 



GINN & COMPANY, PUBLISHERS, 

BOSTON, NEW YORK, CHICAGO, and LONDON. 



